My Photo

Subscribe

Enter your Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

Donations

Thank You!

Tip Jar

Via BuzzFeed
Powered by TypePad
Member since 01/2005

Main | March 2005 »

February 28, 2005

Churchill's Geneology

At FrontPage.org, David Yeagley has an informative piece on the damage that the Ward is doing to real American Indians link. He also brings up a point that I have been thinking about recently, the massaging (if not the absolute fabrication) of geneology to gain favor. Ward Churchill did just that successfully, in order to get tenure at the University of Colorado. According to real geneological researchers, Churchill's only claim to any Indian blood lies in the fact that many, many generations ago a relative was married to an Indian woman. However, that happened after the relative's first wife, a woman with no Indian blood that mothered Churchill's relative, was herself killed by Indians. Therefore, no bloodline connection. That has not prevented Churchill from once boasting that he was a full-blooded Indian, then retracting and saying that he was a quarter Indian, and now ignoring the question altogether.

Yeagley also brings up the subject of geneological fraud, something that I have witnessed firsthand. A long-time hobby of the Boss Squirrel is family history (the family tree, if you will). About ten years ago I found an incredible resource, the local Family History Center of the Morman Church. The Morman Church has undertaken the job of preserving geneological records all over the world, and making them available to anyone to peruse. While I was doing my own family research, I noticed an awful lot of people (of all shapes, sizes, and colors) coming in and asking for local Indian ancestery records. I asked the head of the center why? She said that with the advent of the local casino (then it was only Foxwoods) everyone was trying to establish a link to a member of the tribe in their own families. This was because anyone with that could claim membership in the tribe and would be eligible for financial compensation from the casino. It made her uneasy, she claimed, because she felt that many of the people were not opposed to falsifying records to share in the windfall.

And that's what the Ward did. The Boss Squirrel has a great aunt (or perhaps a great-great aunt) who married a man known in the family as Injun Joe, a real full-blooded Narragansett Indian. They loved each other dearly, and had a long marriage. Perhaps I should call up the Ward and ask him if I could have his job at CU after he leaves...

February 27, 2005

Ward Churchill, Unpluged

For more background material on the Ward that anyone could possibly want, there are two sites: PirateBallerina here link and the Caplis & Silverman Show on KHOW here link (via David Kopel writing at The Volokh Conspiracy).

The Belmont Club, Again

Another good Ward Churchill post at Belmont Club link that shows us two things. First, since enough evidence has been shown about the fraud perpetrated upon Colorado University during his application for tenure, his cohorts on the faculty are attempting to hide behind the First Amendment. Unfortunately, the case is far beyond that point now. Churchill can say whatever he wants, as we can criticize him however we want. But he appears to have commited several legal and moral transgressions unrelated to what he has said that has gotten everyone in an uproar. If I were a faculty member, I'd be outraged about that. He's singlehandedly turned the teaching credential and tenure system at CU into a joke.

And second, apparently there exists in our Constitution the Ninth Amendment which trumps even the First Amendment, when it suits Ward Churchill. Interesting conundrum here. Can CU claim their Ninth Amendment right to trump Churchill's First Amendment Right, mainly that the people have the right to fire a fraud, regardless of what he says?

The Ninth Amendment reads as follows: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." With a little intellectual gymnastics, this Amendament can be used to rationalize any action, as long as it can be traced back to some inherent 'right'. That the excuse used by Churchill to rationalize his physical blockade of a Columbus Day parade some years back. It's an invitation to anarchy. Any act or statement can certainly be found to negatively effect someone's inherent human dignity!

This guy is vile. And no matter what has happened, he's hit the jackpot. From now on, the financial moonbats on the left will make him a rich man, regardless if he keeps his job. Let them. Just don't make the taxpayers do it.

Iraq War Has Been Won

Supurb article by Jack Kelly of the Post-Gazette of Pittsburgh, PA link (via CQ). No, unfortunately the killing and deaths aren't over yet, but contrary to the claims of the usual suspects, with the Iraq elections the war has been essentially won. Much work to be done, to be sure, but when even Hillary thinks it's so, it shouldn't be long before the MSN catches on.

I Thought Only Decent People Were Named Ward!

The Belmont Club has an interesting post on the Ward Churchill Affair and the spinelessness of Colorado University leadership. Putting aside his remarks for a moment, if Churchill got his position fraudulently, as it appears he did, stand up to him. Hoist him with his own petard, if you will (not that I know what a petard is, but it sounds cool). Here's the link.

February 26, 2005

And They Wonder Why We Call Them Feminazis!

Two great articles on the damage that feminists are doing to themselves these days. The first is by Harvey Mansfield, a Professor of Government at Harvard, that discusses the Larry Summers Affair link. The second is by one of my favorite writers, Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute, in City Journal concerning Susan Estrich's recent public meltdown link. Both articles are priceless!

The Valerie Plame Fiasco

In a supremely ironic editorial this morning, the New York Times admits that there is evidence to suggest that there might not have been a crime involved in the Valerie Plame/ Rober Novak affair. The paper who was furiously calling for a special prosecutor to find the Bush Administration source for the illegal 'outing' of Plame now acknowledges that it might have over-reacted. Oh wait, no they're not! They are actually congratulating the judge who this week ruled that the Times did not have to turn over telephone records involving Judith Miller and Philip Shenon, both reporters for the Times, to the special prosecutor that investigating the Plame case. Yes, the same special prosecutor that they themselves demanded! The editorial is here link (registration required, I think).

There never was a crime to investigate. It was made up out of thin air by the MSN, the Democrats, and Joe Wilson to harm Bush's re-election chances. And now it's coming back to bite the New York Times.

I have to hand the Times credit, however. In the editorial, they manage to link Watergate, Iran-Contra, Lewinsky, and Abu-Ghraib together as part of their plea to protect confidential sources. The first three I agree with linking. But Abu-Ghraib? Please. That scandal was brought to light by the Defense Department themselves. It only hit the way it did because a defense attorney for one of the accused sent a DVD of the images to Hersh and 60 Minutes. Then the story hit big.

As a matter of fact, well before the DVD appeared the parents of one of the accused sent letters to many Senators and Congressmen asking for their help. Those that responded replied that they felt the Army had the investigation under control. It was only when the images appeared that many of those same people realized that the scandal could be used to damage the President. And then the ca-ca hit the fan!

Abu-Ghraib is a pet peeve of mine. An isolated, abhorant series of events was intentionally used to damage the President, the Armed Forces and those who serve in it, and the United States in general. All because of partisan politics during an election year. The international damage unjustly done to innocent people and our country was amazing. I'm going to deal with this in further posts as well.

February 25, 2005

Ward Churchill

Just a few comments about Ward Churchill, the Colorado State prof who wrote the "little Eichman's" screed. He's under fire, and deservedly so, not only for his remarks but also because he appears to be a complete fraud. His expertise is the American Indian Movement, he was the head of the Ethnic Studies Department at Colorado, and he is a tenured professor earning over $100,000 in salary alone. And apparently he is a bigger fraud than anyone thought when people started looking into him. Not only is he not an American Indian, which seems to be the reason he was given tenure in the first place, he is apparently pretty close to an art forger. Check this report here link by News 4 in Colorado. Michelle Malkin continues here link. People such as Churchill are so insulated in acadamia that they forget that in the real world people check things out. While he is holding himself up as a victim of the vast right-wing conspiracy and crying that his First Amendment rights are being violated, people are discovering that he is a fake, from beginning to end.

February 24, 2005

Islamic Saudi Academy

The indispensable Frontpage.org has an article this morning on our friend Abu Ali, his so-called 'torture', and the Islamic Saudi Acadamy link. Abu Ali seems to have been a very mischeveous little man. The article also puts the torture allegations in perspective. One thing to remember, in every terrorist training manual that we have found have been instructions on what to do if detained. One of the cardinal rules - always claim torture. It's a great way to get the left involved on your side.

And it is in that spirit that we have this morning's New York Times editorial link complaining that Abu Ali wasn't returned to the United States soon enough and, of course, decrying Abu Ali's "torture" which the Times accepts as fact.

Ben Johnson's article in Frontpage.org also gives a good primer on the problem of madrasses in the United States by examining some of the problems with the Islamic Saudi Academy. Can you imagine the uproar if a Catholic school taught some of the things that the ISA teaches. And the left supports their right to do so! There is, I believe, a difference between incitement and free speech, and there should be a national debate on this subject.

February 23, 2005

Update on Abu Ali

Boy, was something overlooked in the initial reports about Abu Ali, the 23 year old would be assasin of President Bush. And it was probably intentionally overlooked by the AP so as not to 'upset' the Muslim community. It's true, he was valedectorian of his high school. But his high school was actually a Saudi madrassa known as the Islamic Saudi Academy, funded by the government of Saudi Arabia. Madrassas are the primary way that the Saudis promote their Wahabist ideology in foreign countries. Now Abu Ali's travel to Saudi Arabia to join Al-Queda makes more sense. The hard work - the indoctrination into that particular brand of fanaticism - was already started here in the United States in that school.

Frontpage.org forwarded me to an amazing blog called The Jawa Report link. A good primer on this particular aspect of Abu Ali can be found in that blog here link.

Google