[Message from Natsu Taylor Saito below, and attached.]
Hello Folks,
The Regents of the University of Colorado will meet in
late July or early August, when the campus is all but
vacant, to determine Ward Churchill’s fate. Natsu
Saito has written a superb update and synopsis of the
relevant issues related to Ward’s case (see below or
attached), including links to supporting
documentation. She asks each of you send a statement
opposing Ward’s dismissal to the CU Board of Regents
and local print media. The Regent’s email addresses
are included in the update. Print media email
addresses are at the bottom. And, be sure to include
name, address and daytime phone number.
It should be clear by now that the case against
Churchill is fundamentally political. Further,
American Indian Studies experts Eric Cheyfitz and
Michael Yellow Bird have shown that the CU
investigative report on Churchill’s alleged
falsification and fabrication is severely flawed.
Professor Tom Mayer has shown the plagiarism charges
are greatly exaggerated. A still larger issue is who
should define academic freedom, determine the limits
of tenure, and formulate University policy. Should a
fair, objective faculty-driven process as specified by
the Laws of the CU Regents be the norm? Or do you
prefer an autocratic model favored by powerful right
wing foundations like Coors, Olin, Scaife and Bradley
and their cohorts at the American Council of Trustees
and Alumni (ACTA) and their allies in the CU
administration? Even if we fail to stop the
Regents, your input will surely count as this battle
enters a new stage.
The length of your statement is not important the fact
you send one is.
So, please take the time to write.
*********************************************************************************************
Regents to vote on firing Ward Churchill… It’s time to
speak out.
In the next few weeks, the Board of Regents of the
University of Colorado (CU) will vote on the dismissal
of Professor Ward Churchill. This is the final
opportunity for public input in this process.
Over the past two and a half years, many of you have
opposed CU’s attempts to fire Ward. Ward and I have
engaged in this struggle not for the sake of his job
(he will always write, speak and teach), nor because
we enjoy battling bureaucracy, but because it has
become emblematic of contemporary efforts to silence
those who insist on discussing uncomfortable truths.
Since February 2005, CU administrators have been under
intense political and financial pressure to fire Ward
for his statements about the 9/11 attacks. To avoid
blatantly violating the First Amendment, they have
resorted to a pretextual investigation of his
scholarship.
After combing through a media barrage of unfounded
allegations and his more than 20 books, 100 articles,
and over 12,000 footnotes, CU has settled for firing
Ward Churchill, a tenured full professor, for six
instances of alleged improper footnoting or author
attribution (see details below).
Predictably, this has provided sufficient excuse for
those who wish to distance themselves from this
“controversy” and still believe they support academic
freedom. For organizations like Lynne Cheney’s
neoconservative American Council of Trustees and
Alumni (ACTA), it is a major victory for the
corporatization of higher education.
However, those who look beyond the headlines and CU’s
self-serving pronouncements have recognized it as a
charade.
First, the evidence has established that all of the
charges investigated were solicited or invented by
University administrators. None were filed by the
allegedly aggrieved parties.
The specific charges against Ward have been debunked.
Recently, fifteen professors and two attorneys filed
two sets of formal research misconduct allegations
against the investigative committee which wrote the
report used to justify sanctions. These illustrate
that the committee members were so determined to
convict Ward that they engaged in falsification and
fabrication of evidence, twisting the facts to fit
their conclusions. In addition, CU Professor Tom
Mayer has exposed the pretextual nature of the
so-called plagiarism charges.
More generally, Indigenous scholar/activists and their
allies have recognized that this is an attack on those
who challenge mainstream “truths” about U.S. history,
as well as an attempt to eliminate ethnic and gender
studies. Public intellectuals including Derrick Bell,
Noam Chomsky, Richard Falk, Howard Zinn, and Immanuel
Wallerstein published an open letter in the NY Review
of Books denouncing CU’s actions as part of the
repressive post-9/11 “militarist reflex.” A petition
opposing Ward’s dismissal was signed by nearly 500
scholars and activists with Teachers for a Democratic
Society. Many other groups have submitted letters and
petitions denouncing CU’s tactics and calling for
Ward’s reinstatement.
What has meant the most to us, however, has been the
support of elders like Carrie Dann of the Western
Shoshone and Japanese American activist Yuri
Kochiyama, young people who are searching for a way to
cope with an uncertain future, and regular people on
the street – parking lot attendants, baggage handlers,
homeless people – who consistently express their
appreciation that Ward refuses to be silenced. They
know this is not about footnotes.
I hope you will take the time to e-mail the CU Regents
and urge them not to fire Ward Churchill. They can be
reached c/o Millie.Cortez@cu.edu , or individually at
Steve.Ludwig@cu.edu, Cindy.Carlisle@cu.edu,
Patricia.Hayes@cu.edu, Michael.Carrigan@cu.edu,
Tom.Lucero@cu.edu, Steve.Bosley@cu.edu,
Kyle.Hybl@cu.edu, Paul.Schauer@cu.edu,
Tillie.Bishop@cu.edu
(For maximum effectiveness, please cc:
wcsn@gmail.com.)
We have no illusions that the Regents will suddenly
wake up and decide to take academic freedom seriously.
However, the resistance they encounter in firing
Ward Churchill will determine how readily others will
be subjected to similar treatment. Resistance is
never futile, for it defines the terms of the next
struggle.
In solidarity,
Natsu Taylor Saito
Boulder, Colorado
June 20, 2007
p.s. A brief outline of key facts and links follows.
See also http://www.wardchurchill.net and
www.defendcriticalthinking.org.
Key Facts in the Ward Churchill Case
The Charges :
CU’s grounds for dismissal now consist solely of the
charges that Prof. Churchill:
(1) failed to provide sufficient evidence that in
the 1837 smallpox epidemic
(a) infected blankets were obtained from an
infirmary;
(b) an Army doctor or post surgeon told the Mandans
to scatter; and
(c) 400,000 people, as opposed to possibly
300,000, ultimately died;
(2) cited to material he has consistently
acknowledged as ghostwritten;
(3) published an article in Z Magazine in which
the editors, without telling him, deleted his
attribution of co-authorship to “Dam the Dams;” and
(4) copyedited a piece in a book edited by a third
party which, unbeknownst to him, plagiarized Fay
Cohen.
The invalidity of each charge has been shown
demonstrated by Prof. Churchill and numerous other
scholars. But even if they were true, they illustrate
the pretextual nature of the process. No prolific
scholar could withstand such fine-tooth combing of his
or her work.
The Bottom Line : Recognizing that they could not
fire Prof. Churchill directly for his political
speech, CU administrators created a pretext to do so
by soliciting/inventing “research misconduct”
allegations. A biased investigation generated a
handful of technical charges which the University has
falsely labeled “plagiarism” or “fabrication of
evidence.” To date, external political and financial
pressures have trumped the First Amendment and the
principle of academic freedom at the University of
Colorado.
Key Developments:
Feb. 2, 2005: Then-Colorado Governor Bill Owens
demands that Professor Ward Churchill be fired for his
2001 op-ed web posting on the 9/11 attacks.
Feb. 3, 2005: The Regents denounce Ward Churchill’s
statements and authorize then-Interim Chancellor
Philip DiStefano to investigate “every word” he has
published. Though billed as a public meeting, two
people are arrested and prosecuted for attempting to
speak in support of Prof. Churchill.
Mar. 3, 2005: Then-President Betsy Hoffman warns the
Boulder Faculty Assembly of a “new McCarthyism,”
pointing out that there is “no question that there’s a
real danger that the group of people [who] went after
Prof. Churchill now feel empowered.” Within 5 days
Pres. Hoffman announces her resignation.
Mar. 24, 2005: Interim Chancellor DiStefano, who has
never bothered to inform Prof. Churchill of the
investigation, publicly announces that although all of
Prof. Churchill’s writings and speeches are protected
by the First Amendment, the University has received
other allegations which require investigation.
Subsequently it comes out that all of the allegations
actually investigated were either created or solicited
by University administrators.
Spring 2005: The University feeds the media frenzy,
holding press conferences to announce each step of the
“investigation” in direct violation of confidentiality
rules. In turn, news coverage is submitted for
investigation by Interim Chancellor DiStefano as
“complainant.”
Fall 2005: An Investigative Committee is appointed,
chaired by CU law professor Mimi Wesson. Prof.
Churchill is not informed that Prof. Wesson had
circulated a memo in Feb. 2005 comparing Prof.
Churchill to “charismatic male celebrity wrongdoers”
like OJ Simpson, Bill Clinton, and Michael Jackson.
The Committee includes no American Indians and no one
specializing in American Indian or Indigenous Studies.
May 9, 2006: The Investigative Committee holds a
press conference to release its Report, claiming to
have found 7 instances of research misconduct. One
committee member recommends termination, four
recommend suspension.
June 16, 2006: Interim Chancellor DiStefano, the
“complainant,” now becomes sentencing judge,
recommending dismissal.
May 3, 2007: An internal faculty appeal panel finds
the University has not met its burden of proof on some
charges, but upholds others (documentation of the 1837
smallpox epidemic and questions of author
attribution). Two members of the panel support
dismissal; three recommend a 1-year suspension.
Prof. Churchill requests that CU President Hank Brown
recuse himself from the dismissal process, based upon
Brown’s biases, including his close ties to ACTA,
which has consistently denounced Prof. Churchill
(see ACTA’s How Many Ward Churchills?).
May 10 and 28, 2007: Two groups of professors and
attorneys file research misconduct charges against the
Investigative Committee for falsifying and fabricating
evidence against Prof. Churchill in their Report .
The governing board of the Colorado Conference of AAUP
chapters calls on the University not to take action
against Prof. Churchill until the legitimacy and
objectivity of the Report has been investigated.
June 7, 2007: CU President Hank Brown refuses to
recuse himself or delay action, and overrides the
majority of both the Investigative Committee and the
faculty appeal panel to recommend that the Regents
fire Prof. Churchill.
July/Aug 2007: The CU Regents will vote on
dismissing Prof. Churchill.
Quick links :
Two sets of research misconduct charges filed against
CU Investigative Committee:
http://wardchurchill.net/files/misconduct_charges_letter_and_supporting_docs.doc
http://wardchurchill.net/files/rm_indig_sch_052807.pdf
Debunking plagiarism charges:
http://wardchurchill.net/files/mayer_on_plagiarism_charges_0607.pdf
The ACTA connection:
http://wardchurchill.net/files/cu_acta_ad.pdf
Indigenous Studies:
http://wardchurchill.net/files/indig_conf_resol_020307.pdf
NY Review of Books Open Letter:
http://wardchurchill.net/files/open_letter_for_nyrb.pdf
Teachers for a Democratic Society petition:
http://www.teachersfordemocracy.org/?q=node/19
Send letters and op-eds to:
Silver and Gold Record <dodgej@cusys.edu> (most
important)
Daily Camera
Colorado Daily <letters@coloradodaily.com>
Denver Post <openforum@denverpost.com>
Rocky Mountain News <letters@RockyMountainNews.com>
Follow
