Looks like I am in the DU Minority on this one

I am sure you've all read about Ward Churchill. He has his rights to free speech but what he said was outraging, to me as a descendant of people who lost their lives to the Nazis in occupied Europe 60-65 years ago, the fact that this man can compare regular office workers to the man who planned the final solution is outraging and sickening. I don't mind being a minority here on the boards because this is what I believe in, I won't let them kick me down for being a staunch supporter of John Kerry, I won't let em kick me down for being a Catholic, and I won't let them kick me down for not having a black and whtie view of the world. Rant over.

i have seen some threads on Churchill up but have not really looked at them.

can you tell me what it's all about ?

I havent read the threads defending him but I talk to WEL and those who are ballsy enough to go in to GD and supposely people who won't defend Churchill aren't real liberals because of that. I dont know the full extent of his comments but one of Churchill's comments was that the office people who died in 9/11 were "Little Eichmanns", I dont like a lot of the US Foreign Policy abroad either but damnit, Eichmann organized the murders of millions of people.

enough in to put much energy or time into checking out.

I can't get worked up to defend somebody who sounds like a jerk. Maybe he had some good points, but if you are overly inflammatory and slam the wrong people - your point gets lost. I just kind of checked out on that controversy.

A lot of people on DU probably agree with you John, but they are just avoiding those threads because it doesn't seem real important considering all the nasty sh#$ going on in this country and the world.

IMHO
:)

Don't you guys sometimes see controversies that spring up that seem to get a lot of chatter and air play (maybe on the right or left) that you just don't care that much about?

They make it fashionable to bash good democrats who have been fighting for us longer than my life, they bash religions who do good things for people, etc.

side would like to admit.

Sometimes people visualize it as a long line with the

far left-----------center-------------far right.

But it is actually more of a circle with the extremes at either end meeting in their idealogical rigidness - black and white view of the world, win by any means necessary or impose your will because you know better then everyone else.

today, I was like yes I am a commited far leftist democrat but I am also a shades of gray thinker.

Which is precisely the reason i'm staying out of GD :)

I completely agree. They are both sanctimonious and self righteous groups who are detrimental to society.

He compared the captains of the corporate machine to Eichmann. He just said it badly. I don't really understand why there's such a fuss now. As I understand it, this was something he wrote right after 9/11.

The CIA recruited 5 of his associates, so I also don't know why we're in a fuss over what Churchill said and not over what we actually did.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/536364.html

Still comparing to anyone to Eichmann is just a bit extreme, wouldnt you say? I dont understand why the fuss is right now btw, 3 years after the fact.

I understand the point the guy was trying to make. I just don't understand why lefties have to use such extreme language to make it.

Yeah extreme language like that makes leftists look like idiots.

This really sounds like a freeper issue, not a Dem one. I wonder if it is another smoke screan thrown up to divert attention from the wrongdoing of some RWer. The RWer love to dig up crap on some lefty and then wave it like the proverbial 'bloody flag' in order to excuse something tht someone on their side did. I suspect as much in this cae.

So, who is pushing this agenda, why and what are they covering up? A true discussion of the limits and acceptablity of free speech in an academic environment doesn't seem to be the point in this particular donnybrook. (This came up a while ago with the poet lauriet of NJ and his poems that also posited a dark purpose to the US end of the 9/11 tragedies. What is free speech, what are the responsbilities of free speech and are individuals accountable for what they say. Hmm, I think I feel another visit to the Silverglate site coming on.)

2/5/2005 I remember a vague flash about the release of the CIA records and we would finally find out about the Nazi's the CIA recruited. Then poof, that was it. And the Churchill story blew up. I didn't even think about any of it until I went to Google to get the correct spelling of his name and this article popped up.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/536364.html

I hate having to always look for the ulterior motive. But the second we don't, look what blows right by.

Why dredge it up now if it's three years old? It does sound like a distracting tactic.

I believe in defending everybody's right to free speech; I can't just say "only if I like it." It has to apply to everyone. But I can't stand the Nazi comparisons either. It's thrown around way, way, way too much, it cheapens the impact of what the Nazis really did, to whole peoples and a whole continent. To my way of thinking it's only appropriate to bring that up if you're using it in a way that shows a real commitment to "Never again."

Its probably being used to cover up something I bet but yes the Nazi comparsions get me for precisely that reason, at least 6 million Jews and 4 Million Slavs, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc died under the Nazis, I hate big business with all my heart but they are nothing like the man who planned the massacare of the Jews, Adolf Eichmann.

Sometimes I joke with family and friends about our (MD's) gov, Ehrlich, as Hitler Hair, others call him NaziBob. I shouldn't it's in poor taste. Although he is Rethug of gentile German descent, he is not as evil as any Nazi. (Really do not joke about it with Jewish family members).
I do not understand whole discussion. Comparing people who died in 9/11 to Nazis? WTF?
As to free speech, any speech that is a direct threat to the dignity of others should be limited because it does not allow for freedom. Something like "Kill all ____ (fill in the blank with any group of people)." should be monitored. You can't stop people from saying it, but for goodness sakes you need to watch someone like that. Don't know this Ward Churchill, if he's any relation to Winston, he should be ashamed.

but i think it's different if someone in public wants to get across a serious point about something. some of these comments just make it easy to take the focus away from the point being made. and people who might have otherwise agreed with him end up feeling they need to oppose it because they don't want to be associated with someone who says such things.

but it cuts deep to me at least. I agree with you that it takes the focus off the discussion.

I hate crooked corporate bosses more than anyone but Adolf Eichmann to me is one of the most evil men whoever walked this earth.

Can't stand Ehrlich, but he is no Eichmann, for landsakes.