If you have been following some of the recent headlines, you may not have missed this one about Ward Churchill, a professor from the University of Colorado-Boulder who has written an article stating that the people that died on 9/11 are not "victims" and in fact they "deserve" what happened to them because they are a part of the destructive capitalist system.

His article, "Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens" has sparked controversy in recent weeks.

To quote his article, he says that the hijackers on 9/11 have "given Americans a tiny dose of their own medicine," he says. "This might be seen as merely a matter of vengeance of retribution and, unquestionably, America has earned it."

The reason this even became a controversy was because some professors and administrators at Hamilton College (NY) invited him to speak, not on his indigenous/ethnic studies work, but instead on the subject of his article, that ultimately America is to blame for 9/11 and that the "victims" of 9/11 were not victims, but merely complacent Americans who were part of an evil capitalist system that is trying to impose its will on the rest of the world. According to Professor Churchill, the "victims" of 9/11 were either "military targets" (in reference to those that died at the Pentagon) or for those that died in the World Trade Center or on airplanes, "they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break."

His pending speech at Hamilton has drawn criticism from professors and students, including Matt Coppo, a sophomore whose father died in the World Trade Center attacks.

You be the judge. As of last check, Hamilton College still plans to hold the lecture, but has now made it a "panel" to get "other opinions". And, due to Bill O'Reilly and other outspoken voices, Dr. Churchill has now decided not to accept money.

While I respect his freedom of speech, I think at some point we cannot allow professors to hide behind the curtain of "academic freedom" and "freedom of speech." According to the First Amendment, the government cannot stop him from speaking, but that doesn't mean Hamilton College, or his own school, UC-Boulder, has to let him continue his hateful rhetoric. Nor, do we.

To voice your complaint to Hamilton College, you can contact them at: 315-859-4444 or e-mail the school's president Joan Hinde Stewart at jstewart@hamilton.edu

If you have any other comments on this topic, post them here at the ISI Forum.

Just after I posted that last item of discussion, I was informed that the panel that was scheduled at Hamilton College has in fact been cancelled.

Here is where the details of the panel are listed, as well as a note saying it has been cancelled: http://www.hamilton.edu/applications/calendar/detail.cfm?id=12818

In a letter from the President of the College, Joan Hide Stewart (linked from the College's homepage), she says that the panel has been cancelled due to "public safety."

http://www.hamilton.edu/news/more_news/display.cfm?ID=9020

She states, "We have done our best to protect what we hold most dear, the right to speak, think and study freely." But, she says, "Credible threats of violence have been directed at the College and members of the panel. These threats have been turned over to the police."

Personally, I don't know if any "credible threats" were really directed at the school, but I do believe that some of the comments from Professor Churchill's article certainly "threaten" the safety of not only the community at large, but the entire nation. When one justifies terrorism and disrespects the violent deaths of thousands of fellow citizens during a bloody act of terrorism and adds justification to those attacks, he is certainly part of fostering a "credible threat of violence" upon our nation's citizens.

President Stewart says that "there is a higher responsibility that this institution carries, and that is the safety and security of our students, faculty, staff and the community in which we live." If she so believed that, she would not be hiding behind the curtain of "academic freedom" and would have the courage to herself speak up against having such a hateful event on her own campus.

Who else would we be willing to invite to campus? Who would we not be willing to? These are the questions we must ask to truly engage the idea of "protect(ing) what we hold most dear."

There's lots of speculation behind the cancellation, but I would imagine it probably has a lot to do with donations collecting and the adverse effect this publicity has likely had. I am sure there is nothing so sinister as credible death threats ... though I was the family of a September 11 I bet I wouldn't have too many concerns about his welfare ...

This man is the quintessence of the radical left wing establishment in academia gone completely awry ... no, pardon me, nuts. It is reasonable to explore all aspects of the terrorists attacks, and even to ask what part, if any, we may have played in creating excuses for the attacks. Note I say excuses, not "instigation" ... excuses are rarely reasonable or valid motivations.

But this man has taken leave of his senses. To be so blinded by idealogy or whatever insane agenda he pursues to accuse men women and children slaughtered in the towers, the pentagon and in Pennsylvania of being accomplices to whatever great crime we have committed is insensitive if not ruthless. He applies copability to those who for the better part probably thought very little of the middle east, terrorists and their cause. They were for the better part ordinary Americans doing ordinary American things!

His stretch in analysis and conclusions I think should certainly give pause for thought amongst any university executive board. Most universities place great value in clear thought with strong, connected conclusions. It is my thought that most academics should want to exclude Churchill's ranting and raving because of its lack of "structural" integrity.

And that is why I feel his work should be excluded, and the man ostracized. Freedom of speech guarantees freedom from government censorship. Other than that, the populace is free to censor whatever they wish on their own account. This man deserves exactly that.

I feel that this professor should not be teaching and I hope that the regents dismiss him. I like how some of the students (many looked like avid Marxists) came out to support him. While he has the right to his distorted beliefs, the state also has the right to get rid of him as he is taxpayer supported. I would like to know what the reaction would have been if he would have said that Hitler was a great guy or the like? Professors should leave their wacked out views at the front door of their homes.

If you have ever read his books, you would know that he should have been fired long ago. His attempt to make a point, or to be witty is often less of an apology for the "other" (i.e. native Americans, or women) in history, and often more of a direct frontal assult on all of us (the "others" included) now. I think he has forgotten that by and large Americans today are not gun toting cowboys out for blood, and by and large we are not hateful toward women or minorities. If you look at America as a static event, a monolithic civilization incapalbe of change, then I could see where you come up with inane ideas like his. Thank God the real world does not work the same we he thinks it does. Let's hope his dismissal letter let's him know that.