Last Tuesday, University of Colorado President and former US Senator [tag]Hank Brown[/tag] received a report from a faculty committee regarding its hearing on alleged research misconduct by Professor Churchill. According to University spokeswoman Michele McKinney, Brown has 15 business days to determine how to proceed – whether are no grounds for dismissal or recommend sanctions such as suspension. There are still many more steps in the process if Brown recommends dismissal.

The relentless pursuit of Professor Churchill is a manifestation of this country’s new form of McCarthyism, which has serious implications on academic freedom and free speech in the US. Churchill has been singled out by the ultra-right, with the assistance of Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly. The controversy erupted shortly after Churchill was invited to participate on a panel at Hamilton College for an essay “Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens,” he wrote soon after the events of 9/11 came to light.

The passage that has caused the greatest controversy concerned the innocence of some of the victims died in the World Trade Center attacks. Churchill accused some of victims were “technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire” and “little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers.” Whether Churchill’s statement is viewed flawed and reactionary, this does not mean, this grants the ultra-right the right to exploit the controversy in an attempt to advance their ongoing Culture Wars by seeking to demolish free speech rights, liberal and left values, and the academic tenure system, which in their view protects crazed radicals corrupting the minds of youth.

The Right launched a series of attacks on his character and ethnic background, to distort his intention and meaning, and to demand that he be fired from a tenured position designed to protect academics from ideological persecution. Conservative politicians and media pundits demonized Churchill as a “madman” and “cheerleader for terrorists” who spews vile “hate speech” tantamount to treason. Right-wing pundits like Bill O’Reilly, among others urging their listeners to flood Hamilton College, the University of Colorado, and Colorado politicians with letters of complaint demanding that Churchill be fired.

Reaction to Churchill’s views was swift and predictable at the state capitol. Colorado Governor Bill Owens declared, “all decent people … should denounce the views of Ward Churchill” since they “are at odds with simple decency.” He later demanded that he be fired from his tenure. The Colorado House of Representatives released a Joint Resolution in support of the 9/11 victims’ families and vilified Churchill for striking “an evil and inflammatory blow against America’s healing process.”

Within the Colorado university community, reaction was mixed. The reaction from the university’s administration was more controlled. The Chancellor Phil DiStefano, stated that even though Churchill’s statements was “offensive,” and that his the essay had “outraged and appalled us and the general public;” the chancellor held that Churchill had the right to “hold and express his views, no matter how repugnant, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.”

The Colorado administration suddenly decided to begin a 30-day inquiry into “Professor Churchill’s writings, speeches, tape recordings and other works.” The special panel was to look into two issues: whether Churchill’s actions “including his speech, provide any grounds for dismissal for cause” and “if so, is this conduct or speech protected by the First Amendment against University action?”

The report concluded that the First Amendment protected Churchill’s essay and that he could not be dismissed for making such statements. However, the panel determined that there were concerns regarding “standards of professional integrity,” including charges of possible “research misconduct.” The question that should have been asked, if Professor Churchill’s scholarship were an issue, wouldn’t they have discovered all this during his tenure review or during his promotion to Chair of his department, which he later resigned because of the controversy.

Make no mistake, these attacks are politically timed and motivated by the right wing to dismantle the freedom of speech on university campuses nationwide. It is spearheaded in large part by David Horowitz and his David Horowitz Freedom Center (formerly known as Center for the Study of Popular Culture) and Frontpagemag.com, and the Association of College Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). Horowitz’s is under the impression that the current political make-up on American universities is predominately left leaning. While many may see Horowitz as kook and a windbag, the fact is, that is his modus operandi.

Horowitz works closely with Karl Rove and other top national Republican leaders, Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. He has singled out professors for intellectual ridicule and political vilification. Mastering in the art of rhetoric and spin, he has been on a campaign promoting his “Academic Bill of Rights,” – the Orwellian version of valuing intellectual diversity among faculty and protecting students whose political views differ with their professors.

Aiding Horowitz in the attack on critical thinking is [tag]ACTA[/tag], the Washington-based conservative academic “watch-dog” group which released a report last year titled “How Many Ward Churchills?” attacking “undergraduate liberal arts curriculum as it exists on America’s campuses today.” ACTA was founded by Lynne Cheney, the wife of Vice President Dick Cheney, and Sen Joe Lieberman in 1995.

After 9/11, ACTA established the Defense of Civilization Fund to support the study of American history and civics and of Western civilization. The Funds first project was the notorious report written in 2001 “Defending Civilization: How Our Universities Are Failing America,” which asserted that “colleges and university faculty have been the weak link in America’s response to the attack” and to fight this weakness American history and Western civilization must be reinstituted and expanded in our colleges.

The fact remains that academe is the only sector of American society that is distinctly divided in its response. Indeed, expressions of pervasive moral relativism are a staple of academic life in this country and an apparent symptom of an educational system which has increasingly suggested that Western civilization is the primary source of the world’s ills – even though it gave us the ideals of democracy, human rights, individual liberty, and mutual tolerance. (page 5)

We believe that the West will fight for its own survival. But only if we know what we are fighting for. … We call upon all colleges and universities to adopt strong core curricula that include rigorous, broad-based courses on the great works of Western civilization as well as courses on American history, America’s Founding documents, and America’s continuing struggle to extend and defend the principles on which it was founded. If institutions fail to do so, alumni should protest, donors should fund new programs, and trustees should demand action. (page 7)

This is disturbing parallel between what is happening in academia now and the educational scenario of Germany during the Nazi build-up and consolidation of power. After Hitler came to power in 1933, political resistance was crushed. Dissent was to be silenced; professions like law and institutions that might challenge the new regime were to be subdued and recast. Eventually, the Nazi Party dominated the teaching profession by dictating who entered it and who got promoted. By the 1940s, the Nazis had a completely compliant cadre of teachers and professors.

When CU President Elizabeth Hoffman made comments suggesting that a McCarthyite atmosphere was being fanned in connection with the Churchill case, she was pressured to resign and was succeeded by one Hank Brown, who is coincidentally a co-founder of ACTA. Now that the decision is up to President Brown, there can be no doubt that ACTA and Horowitz are licking their chops waiting to see Professor Churchill get the ax.

Since September 11, 2001 many forms of mainstream liberalism have been denounced as anti-American. Anyone who believes in the democratic value of [tag]academic freedom[/tag], who understands that protecting unfettered scholarly inquiry is crucial to developing and sustaining a healthy democratic society. Without the First Amendment, we would be stuck in one way of thinking, frozen in a single moral code, and dissuaded from collective introspection and change. Freedom of speech is part of what keeps us moving forward, and we all have a responsibility to protect it.

x-posted on Scholars and Rogues

It was also reported that the Virginia Tech massacre resembles another campus shooting that occurred in Austin, TX, where Charles Joseph Whitman, the Texas Tower sniper, fired 150 high-powered rounds of ammunition from the University of Texas Tower killing 16 people and wounding nearly 50 people. Until now, UT shooting was considered the deadliest campus shooting in US history. It has even surpassed the Luby’s massacre of 1991, in which twenty-four people were killed.

All this news can be found on almost any blog and news website. As more and more news emerges, there are several disturbing facts that happen to be over looked, but reveal a lot about how this country handles a crisis.

Playing the “Blame the Immigrant” Game: Inaccurate media reports
Once it was reported that the shooter was an Asian immigrant, Asians have suddenly become the latest media topic. However, there is more than scapegoat one particular group; during the chaos, there was a troubling sign from the media in trying to link an individual act with something larger. Soon after the story broke, Chicago Sun-Times columnist [tag]Michael Sneed[/tag] initially reported (which is no longer online) that the shooter was not only a Chinese immigrant but also a possible terrorist. The original link to that story has been updated with the correct information; however, the original report can still be viewed in its entirety on the pro-gun community forum named The Firing Line. Sneed wrote:

Authorities were investigating whether the gunman who killed 32 people on the [tag]Virginia Tech[/tag] campus in the deadliest shooting rampage in U.S. history was a Chinese man who arrived in the United States last year on a student visa.

The 24-year-old man arrived in San Francisco on United Airlines on Aug. 7 on a visa issued in Shanghai, the source said. Investigators have not linked him to any terrorist groups, the source said.

In an apparent effort to be on top of the story, it was immediately picked up and cited by other corporate media, such as FOX News, MSNBC, and ABC News. A screen shot of the article can be found on the blog, Letters from China.

Even worse, one of the most unfortunate media debacles over the VA Tech shootings was the false accusations levied against Wayne Chiang, a Chinese-American who happens to collect guns and who also attends VT who also recently broke up with his girlfriend. Without waiting for the details from the local authority and going on a unfounded and stereotype-based “tip,” [tag]Fox News[/tag] reporters [tag]Geraldo[/tag] Rivera and [tag]Megyn Kelly[/tag] (video) insisted that Wayne Chiang “might have been the perpetrator” as Fox News not only were searching for his residence but also kept broadcasting his pictures from his Facebook page all over the airwaves.

… on the Fox Network, Geraldo Rivera broadcast Chiang’s Facebook page – though not his name – stating, “people might suspect that this might have been the perpetrator.” Fox News correspondent Megyn Kelly then explained how, upon discovery of Chiang’s profile, the channel searched for him.

Sadly, Chiang was not only a victim of profiling, but also a victim of the old stereotype that “all Asians look the same.” Or, as he put it, was “five for five.” According Chiang, he was forced to go public after an Internet lynch mob targeted Chaing throughout the day with “numerous death threats, slanderous accusations, and ….. [a] barrage of [phone] calls.” By the end, his site had over 166,000 page views and on Tuesday, he had over 333,000 people visit his site. On the day of the massacre, his site was quickly filled with hate-filled comments such as: “so u are the asisan that shot up the school. i hate u and your people.” (note: comments are closed now)

In an interview with ABC, Chiang said: “Right now pretty much the internet thinks it is me … I am just interested in trying to clear my name.” One would think that once the gunman was properly identified this was an open and shut case in the court of public opinion, no debate, time to move on, unfortunately, this is not the case for Chaing. According to Chiang’s latest entry, he is still being “misidentified” as the shooter.

But Chiang wasn’t the only one who discovered how effective the internet can be in spreading unstoppable slurs and libel, At one point mechanical engineering student James Jay Kim also was “outed” as the killer. Kim was originally named in a Facebook discussion, which was later mention on the popular online encyclopedia, Wikipedia. The page was removed an hour later.

James Jay Kim was named in a Facebook discussion between students when one user asked the question: ‘Does anyone know who the shooter is?’ Kim’s name was posted in a reply, with other participants claiming they had been told by sources at the university that it was ‘definitely’ him.

It is not surprising for people to overreact in a time of crises; sometimes people may mishear or misinterpret information they may have heard. However, I don’t think that person misheard the news they were told from their inside sources from the university. The picture below is an AP photo taken by The Roanoke Times Alan Kim, the caption states: “An unidentified man is restrained during a manhunt on the Virginia Tech campus.” Unfortunately, it remains unclear who that person was and if he actually played a role in the shooting or if that person is actually James Jay Kim. These are questions we may never know or find out.

Since the media never apologized for misleading the public that day, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao criticized the media the next day and said “that it is was a terrible mistake and a violation of professional ethics to publish reports before checking the facts.”

What is unfortunate about the aftermath of this tragedy is not that it further proves that this county is xenophobic, but the sloppy reporting actually had consequences. Because of Sneed’s column, a host of international websites carried the story with such headlines “Chinese student suspected of Virginia massacre,” which actually caused a near panic in China. When the report turned out to be incorrect, Sneed’s article was removed and updated, however, Sneed, without apologizing, provided a weak excuse for her reckless reporting.

Sneed’s online report Monday afternoon stated the initial investigation led law enforcement authorities to a preliminary suspect, who was a man from China.

Details and a description of the preliminary suspect accompanied reports available to law enforcement agencies via a national network checking on possible terrorist activities.

Sneed was not the only who tried to cover up their mess after causing a stir. According to a post on Sepia Mutiny, right-wing pundit [tag]Debbie Schlussel[/tag] reported that the shooter might be a “Paki” Muslim and according to Media Matters, she also claimed it was part of “a coordinated terrorist attack.”

The Virginia Tech campus has a very large Muslim community, many of which are from Pakistan (per terrorism investigator Bill Warner).

Pakis are considered “Asian.”

Even if it does not turn out that the shooter is Muslim, this is a demonstration to Muslim jihadists all over that it is extremely easy to shoot and kill multiple American college students.

Unsurprisingly, Schlussel also deleted her post from her blog, stating she was “spending too much time monitoring the slimy comments from the Nazi-infested Media Matters for America cretins.”

This is a disturbing trend among white [tag]media pundits[/tag] in an effort to steer an entire population into thinking that one individual represents a whole community, even to the point of personifying a whole nation. They have no problem conjuring up bogeymen out of thin air, creating enemies out of lies and manipulations. To them, it is all about the rates and the first to provide a juicy gossip regardless if they ruined the lives and careers of honorable men and women; or create division and animosity between citizens. And when they’re caught, it has become second nature to amend their information in real time to cover up their sloppy tracks.

It is not surprising to see the political and media establishment responding to the Virginia Tech massacre as it does to every significant event of social malaise, with a combination of denial and self-delusion. It will be business as usual where a large majority of our society will never talk about the dirty little secret of assimilation or the myth of America’s model minority and how it does not always prevent racial alienation, rage, or depression.

Once, in English class, the teacher had the students read aloud, and when it was Cho’s turn, he just looked down in silence, Davids recalled. Finally, after the teacher threatened him with an F for participation, Cho started to read in a strange, deep voice that sounded “like he had something in his mouth,” Davids said.

“As soon as he started reading, the whole class started laughing and pointing and saying, ‘Go back to [tag]China[/tag],’” Davids said.
…
“There were just some people who were really mean to him and they would push him down and laugh at him,” Roberts said. “He didn’t speak English really well and they would really make fun of him.”

Given that the model minority myth elevates Asians over minority groups, we can expect to see Cho dissected as an anomaly among South Koreans who “are not prone” to violence. But one thing for sure, this tragedy will only add fuel to the heated immigration debate and the need to increase deportation.