Professor Sues To Get Job Back

Fired Columbia Teachers College professor Madonna Constantine is filing a lawsuit in Manhattan Supreme Court to get her job back. She's claiming that the firing was racially motivated.

She was fired over charges of plagiarism, but is best known for an incident where someone placed a noose on her office door. No one has been charged in that criminal act, and investigators are no closer to determining who committed the crime than they were when it happened.

Noose-ance

Disgraced professor Madonna Constantine of Columbia University continues to play games with her status, though she has backed off her claims of racism.

"So much of it is political, it is sick," said Madonna Constantine. "Let them make it a racial issue. It's all about alliances."

"All of this is very fishy," the ejected educator said. "I don't know what to think in terms of motivation. I think the climate is political."

Constantine, a tenured professor of psychology and education with a focus on racial issues, was fired on June 12 after an outside panel ruled she had plagiarized other work in her articles.

At the time, Constantine said she felt "systematically targeted."

"As one of the only two tenured black women full professors at Teachers College, it pains me to conclude that I have been specifically and systematically targeted," she said.

The firing caps off a rocky series of events at the school that came to a head last October when Constantine said she discovered the noose dangling from the handle of her office door as the school's investigation raged. Police opened a criminal probe but have yet to identify a suspect.

But Constantine insisted yesterday she was innocent - and that it was she who had been plagiarized.

Her attorney, Paul Giacomo, displayed a briefing in which he claimed that in all the instances she was accused of copying the ideas of others, her work had actually appeared first.

"They are trying to whitewash and get rid of this toxic situation," Giacomo said. "They were trying to eliminate the situation by eliminating Dr. Constantine."

He said his client had until July 15 to decide whether she would appeal the firing to a faculty committee.

If she does not, he said, she will be paid through the end of the year. If Constantine does appeal, she will no longer be paid.

A lengthy examination of her academic record revealed multiple instances of plagiarism, which was grounds for her suspension in anticipation of being fired from the University's Teachers College.

The toxic situation is a professor whose academic history is replete with examples of academic misconduct, and grandstanding will not make the stink disappear.

Indeed, the NYPD is still investigating the incident involving the hanging of a noose on Constantine's door. Considering that the incident nearly coincides with the university's investigation into her academic misconduct, one may suspect that it was nothing more than a hoax to divert attention from Constantine's own issues. If that was indeed the case, Constantine's lucky just to get fired.

Columbia University Suspends Prof Who Made Noose Claim

Professor Madonna Constantine made the news in October 2007 for claiming that someone stuck a noose on her door. That incident remains unsolved, but a closer look at Constantine's academic record showed that she engaged in repeated examples of plagiarism.

After a lengthy examination, she's been put on indefinite suspension by the Teachers College at Columbia University.

In a letter sent out today to Teachers College faculty, the college president, Susan Fuhrman, and dean, Tom James, said the faculty advisory committee had rejected Ms. Constantine's appeal of the plagiarism charges. They said Ms. Constantine was suspended as of today, but that she is entitled to appeal the decision or request a hearing before the faculty executive committee.

The letter, obtained by The New York Sun from a Teachers College source, said the faculty advisory committee upheld an 18-month investigation by a Manhattan law firm, Hughes Hubbard & Reed, which found that Ms. Constantine had plagiarized two dozen times works of two former doctoral students and a former colleague.

I'm still wondering whether we will learn whether the noose incident was nothing more than a hoax and/or ploy to distract attention from her concerns over her academic misconduct.

They Didn't Have This On My College Curriculum

A college course offers excursion to a Nevada brothel. What exactly were they going to study? Business plans? Human sexuality? Sociological investigations in the nature of male-female interactions where financial transactions are involved?

Actually, it's that latter part.

Amouri was one of a dozen Randolph College students who toured the Chicken Ranch, a legal bordello in the desert 60 miles outside Las Vegas. Thursday's class trip, which included seminars from the working girls, capped a course on American consumption and "the ideas that consume us."

"I think it's fascinating, this is fun for me," said Amouri, a junior at the private liberal arts school in Lynchburg, Va., that until last year admitted only women. "Not many people get to do this."

Academic and media inquiries are daily occurrences at many of Nevada's 27 legal brothels. Some shy away from the scrutiny, others, like the Chicken Ranch, welcome the publicity.

"We're always open to trying to educate the public about legalized prostitution," said Chicken Ranch general manager Debbie Rivenburgh, who acknowledged this was the first class tour request she'd received in 21 years.

Wacademics in Britain

Prof. David Newman, professor of political geography at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, was scheduled to take part in an event entitled "Israel-Palestine" on Tuesday at Imperial College London's Student Union as part of its Political Philosophy Society's Conflict Case-Study Week.

On the panel is Robin Kealy, a former UK consul-general in Jerusalem. But it also features Azzam Tamimi, director of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought in London.

Tamimi is a Hamas supporter who does not recognize Israel's right to exist, openly calls for its destruction, and supports suicide bombings.

In a BBC interview in 2004, Tamimi said that the act of suicide bombing was "glorious and honorable." In the same interview, Tamimi boasted that he would himself carry out a suicide bombing in Israel. In 2006, Merrill Lynch pulled its sponsorship from an event at University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies because of Tamimi's participation.

Such is the state of academics in Britain. No wonder you've got people like Simon Jenkins preaching abandonment of Afghanistan to the Taliban and the Islamists.

Knock My Socks Off: Live Blogging Columbia U. Forum

This post is a work in progress as I liveblog the Ahmadinejad event at Columbia. Just keep scrolling for the latest information.

I'm genuinely surprised to see that Columbia's President Lee Bollinger is actually slamming Ahmadinejad and his country's record on human rights, Holocaust denial, and other related issues. Given the way that Bollinger has acted throughout this whole affair, it is surprising to see him take such a harsh tact.

Of course, he has to prevaricate and qualify matters

"You exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator."

No. He is a petty and cruel dictator. Killing political opponents, executing minorities and religious groups and persecution along religious and political grounds is a fact.

Bollinger continues talking about Iran's proxy forces attacking US forces in Iraq. Iran is supporting enemies of the US, and who are engaged in attacking US interests in the region. Iran is the enemy.

Ahmadinejad will simply claim that Bollinger's facts are wrong and that this is nothing but propaganda. Ahmadinejad will ignore all this and say whatever he wants to. Bollinger gets to claim that he did all he could to hold Ahmadinejad accountable, but the fact is that this opening statement is done for the benefit of the alumni who were righteously pissed at Columbia allowing Ahmadinejad to speak there at all.

So, Ahmadinejad starts off by blasting Bollinger for going after Iran and Ahmadinejad's position. He's already holding to form, attacking Bollinger and claiming that Bollinger's facts are wrong.

Ahmadinejad continues by lecturing on how the world works. He goes back to the story of God and Adam. He's going into a theological discussion of how he is on the side of the righteous - a Muslim.

UPDATE:
Hot Air and LGF are both live blogging this rambling and nearly incomprehensible speech. It is a religious discourse, and doesn't even address any of the substantive points raised by Bollinger.

That's the point, of course. Ahmadinejad wasn't there to address Bollinger - he is there to teach of the nature of Islam and the need to submit to Islam.

UPDATE:
Ahmadinejad is busy talking about how religion and science come together - but you have to be sufficiently spiritual for the science to be used for proper purposes. In other words, he's laying out the justification for Iran's nuclear program because he's using science for a desired goal - furthering the spiritual.

He's busy trying to spin wiretaps and US national security measures as though this is somehow an anathema to our way of life. Protecting our country from foreign terrorists is a bad thing.

UPDATE:
Ahmadinejad is now busy slamming US use of nuclear weapons on Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and use of depleted uranium in US weapons systems. He's now complaining of the monopoly of power - nuclear power in particular. Figures. He wants that very power for his own country, so this is an appeal to democratize nuclear weapons and nuclear power to those who have no intention to use them for peaceful purposes.

UPDATE:
Science is a divine gift, and Ahmadinejad is making a religious argument in favor of having access to nuclear technology.

UPDATE:
Ahmadinejad is now complaining about Israel and the Palestinians. For 60 years, Palestinians have been trying to kill Israelis. To Ahmadinejad, it's all violence one way.

This interpreter is completely kludging the Holocaust subject. It's incomprehensible. He's questioning the arrest of holocaust deniers and "researchers". Holocaust denial is a criminal act in some European countries, including in Germany, originators of the Holocaust in the first place. He's claiming that the Palestinians are paying for a European crime - that they're victims.

Let's just ignore jihad and the terrorism inflicted by those Palestinian terrorism.

More to the point, Ahmadinejad is laying the groundwork for supplying Palestinian terrorists and proxy forces to attack Israel.

UPDATE:
The crowd is mixing cheers and boos at the completion of Ahmadinejad's lecture.

First question: Do you or your government seek the destruction of Israel: "We're friends of all nations." Ahmadinejad is sidestepping the question - talking about those few Jews living in Iran, rather than address the question. He is pushing the Palestinian point of view, which itself calls for the destruction of Israel. He's calling for a "free referendum", even as the Palestinians have repeatedly voted for the destruction of Israel - they voted for Hamas, which seeks Israel's destruction.

Ahmadinejad talks about self-determination of Palestinians. Right. And the crowd cheers.

Bollinger wants a clearer answer. Yes or no.

He questions the question, ignoring the question. And the crowd cheers.

Question two: Aid to terrorists.
Again, he's questioning the question. He now claims that the Iranians are a victim of terrorism. He's claiming that the US is supporting terrorists that have attacked Iranian leaders. He's busy deflecting the question and now brings up root causes - the root cause being the US and Israel's very existence.

UPDATE:
Questioning need to do further research on Holocaust research? For what purpose. That was an awful question.

Ahmadinejad is questioning the Holocaust's existence, and supports holocaust deniers. This question only opened up the opportunity for Ahmadinejad to claim that he's demanding alternative approaches to studying the Holocaust as an academic pursuit - namely addressing Holocaust denial through the mirror of the Palestinians. He says what does the Holocaust have to do with the Palestinian people.

UPDATE:
The crowd takes exception to the assertion that homosexuality doesn't exist in Iran. Well, considering that the punishment is death, if you were gay in Iran you wouldn't want to go out of your way to go public with that knowledge. It would be a fatal decision.

Women are treated like crap in Iran, and yet Ahmadinejad says that they're fully respected.

UPDATE:
What a farce. Ahmadinejad was not engaged in debate, but instead lectured the audience over what his worldview is and what ours should be. He complained that we do not have free speech, but Iran does. He complains about the restrictions on his country to seek nuclear power, while the US and the West restricts such information.

It was nothing more than a way to push the Iranian agenda, and no one held Ahmadinejad to account for his government's actions - whether it was terrorism against the US directly, such as the 1979 invasion of the US embassy in Tehran and the hostage incident, or indirectly via proxy groups such as the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks and the ongoing issue with Iranian weapons used against US forces in Iraq.

UPDATE:
A full transcript of the event is now available.

UPDATE:
Instapundit has a good roundup of reactions from around the 'sphere, as does Pajamas Media, American Digest, and Michelle Malkin.

As for why Ahmadinejad can claim there are no gays in Iran, here's a photo expose to show the real reason.

Columbia's Selective Open Arms

Today, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is scheduled to speak at a conference at Columbia University. The university has defended its decision to allow Ahmadinejad to speak on campus saying that it would have invited Hitler to speak.

It's an apt comparison considering that Ahmadinejad has repeatedly made statements that Hitler would find comforting - namely the destruction of Israel and the annihilation of Jews living there. Ahmadinejad takes that a step further, demanding that the West submit to Islam or face consequences.

He's going to speak of root causes, finding common cause with leftists here in the US who find fault with everything that the US does around the world, ignoring all the evil wrought by totalitarian dictatorships, theocracies, and thugocracies around the world, including in Iran.

These academics speak as though Ahmadinejad is here to engage in dialog. They couldn't be more hopelessly wrong. Ahmadinejad is here to proseletyze. Columbia decided in its infinite wisdom to allow Ahmadinejad to speak claiming that it would open dialog. Ahmadinejad isn't interested in dialog. He's interested solely in furthering his agenda. He wants people to submit to Islam - to convert to his way of life. That is the salvation that he seeks for us. If we choose not to submit and stand in opposition to his worldview, he will bring nothing but pain and misery.

These academics ignore this or worse, they have no problem with Ahmadinejad's statements since they mesh well with their own worldview on American hegemony.

Columbia students are mixed on whether this is a good idea or not, but that there are so many who think that Ahmadinejad speaking on campus is a good idea suggests that something is rotten to the core in academia - good and evil are no longer distinctions worthy of being taught and that extending the invite to Ahmadinejad allows evil to speak on campus.

That there are groups that are arranging to protest Ahmadinejad's visit is admirable, as are those alumni opposed to the visit, but the University has made its decision, and will have to live with the foul stench of knowing that the University played host to a Holocaust denier and a leader who seeks to destroy Israel and the West unless it heels to his version of Islam.

I can recall that more than a decade ago my alma mater sought to bring a Turkish leader to speak at commencement. Such a holy stink was raised about the fact that he denied the existence and/or extent of the Armenian genocide, that the university thought twice and changed its mind - avoiding a messy situation. Is not Holocaust denial in the same league? You can argue that my alma mater chose poorly and should have extended the invitation to speak, but by doing so, they would have provided a prominent platform to speak. The invitation to speak at a university is an honor that should not be doled out lightly or to someone whose worldview is an anathema to the facts and historical record.

UPDATE:
Rudy Giuliani has issued a statement condemning Ahmadinejad's visit and goes through a litany of reasons why we must stand opposed to his very presence. Don Surber has the details. Don notes that Ahmadinejad has a right to speak. I disagree. Ahmadinejad's regime has no problem cracking down on its opponents - shuttering newspapers and media outlets. It arrests people on political crimes and executes those that engage in unIslamic acts.

However, Ahmadinejad will be exposed to a very real demonstration of the right of free speech that many Americans take for granted. I expect a very vociferous crowd to engage in the kind of activities that Ahmadinejad would seek to squelch had this occurred in Tehran and not New York City. It will be a very real demonstration of the power of free speech in shouting down this Holocaust denier and genuine threat to national security and regional stability in the Middle East as a supplier to terrorists around the world.

UPDATE:
One of Ace's readers points out that Columbia University did extend an invitation to Hitler's ambassador to the US to speak in 1933. 1933 was also the year that the Dachau concentration camp opened for business.

UPDATE:
The so called exchange of ideas is going to be something less than spontaneous. It's going to be a closely monitored and tightly controlled affair.

Closed to the public, no protest signs allowed, questions to be asked via index card with no back-and-forth between the students and honored guest. A “free exchange of ideas” indeed. In a way I’m glad, though: this puts all the pressure on Bollinger to grill him. If he softballs him — which he probably won’t lest the few remaining scraps of his credibility end up in the toilet — he’ll never hear the end of it.

Bollinger will simply move on to the next issue within a week, regardless of what happens. He will have the backing of much of the faculty, even though the dean of the law school came out in opposition of the visit. Kudos for him. Now, if only more had the courage of their convictions to speak out against this travesty.

Protestors are out in large numbers around the campus. Kudos to them to show Ahmadinejad that he's not welcome here. Welcome to free speech Mahmoud. Pam at Atlas Shrugs has more, including a list of rallies and ways to protest.

Lee Bollinger, Columbia's President still frames this as a matter of free speech and academic freedom. No word on whether he'll ask Ahmadinejad about all the political prisoners held in Iranian jails or executed for violating the tenets of Islam. No word on whether he'll ask about the curriculum taught in Iranian schools, or the rampant anti-Semitism broadcast on Iranian television that indoctrinates still another generation of Iranians to hate Israel, Jews, and the West.

The Foul Stench

Columbia University is now in a no-win situation - they've invited Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak - citing free speech and an attempt to engage in dialogue with a genocidal-inspired thug, so revoking that invitation isn't going to look good. It's going to take a hit because they extended the invite and/or accepted his invitation to speak.

Consider that before he is scheduled to arrive in NYC, he attended a military parade in Iran, where his country's latest missiles were displayed - complete with signs calling for death to Israel and death to US. He warned that the US must leave the Middle East (the or else death and destruction and mayhem were understood and implicit in his statements).

Columbia's President has said that if they had the chance, they would have invited Hitler to speak. Well, at least he's in the same ballpark. Ahmadinejad alternatively claims that the Holocaust never existed and that he wants to finish the job. In any event, he wants to see Israel destroyed, and it all fits with his religious visions for the region and the world.

I fully expect Ahmadinejad to call for the US to submit to Islam and that is the only kind of dialog that he's interested in. He will also call for the US to get out of Iraq and the Middle East along with a cessation of support for Israel. That's all red meat issues for academics who are largely anti-Israel to begin with and overwhelmingly were against the US actions in Iraq.

It didn't have to be like this. Columbia didn't have to extend an invitation or accept an invitation to speak, knowing exactly what Ahmadinejad is all about. These academics claim that it is seeking dialog. That would necessarily require a two way conversation. Ahmadinejad isn't interested in conversation. He's interested in conversion. You either accept what he says, or you suffer the consequences. There is no doubt about what he seeks to do. He's quite clear on the matter.

What the University fails to recognize is that by giving Ahmadinejad a platform from which to spew his venom, the university is undermining the anti-Ahmadinejad forces within Iran who do not want to see Ahmadinejad's apocalyptic visions come to fruition. Columbia either doesn't care about this, or doesn't think that their invitation to speak will have repercussions beyond the halls of the university.

This is going to be one crazy week in NYC, that's for sure. If you're wondering where the foul stench of saltpeter and sulfur is coming from, one only has to look towards the United Nations and Columbia University.

Attention Getter

This is what happens when you write stuff and it raises questions. People start looking at everything you've written. Everything.

Look at what happened with Ward Churchill. He said some truly stupid and reprehensible stuff about 9/11, but that got people looking at what else he wrote and said. It turned out that he invented a bunch of stuff, engaged in plagiarism and other academic misconduct.

He was fired for his troubles, though he and his supporters think the firing was political. No. He was hired for political reasons, and fired because of academic misconduct.

Then, we come to the latest case of journalistic liberties in facts and logic. That would be Scott Thomas Beauchamp. Not only are his diary entries at The New Republic under scrutiny from bloggers and the US military, but it would now appear that he may have violated operational security (opsec) on troop movements by publishing details of his unit's deployment to Iraq. That's a big problem for him regardless of how the other facts pan out.

Violating opsec is a punishable offense under the UCMJ.

And the ongoing investigation by the US military is sure to turn up interesting nuggets on Beauchamp and his stories as the veracity of his stories remains the central issue.

UPDATED: Ward Churchill Fired By University of Colorado

It couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Churchill is being fired because he was a plagiarist and lied about his background. It has nothing to do with his comments about 9/11, though those comments didn't help - they helped ignite an interest in his background, which was quite revealing.

"Today, I issued to Professor Churchill a notice of intent to dismiss him from his faculty position at the University of Colorado Boulder," CU Interim Chancellor Phil DiStefano said Monday afternoon.

Churchill has 10 days to appeal, which entails making a request to have the university president or chancellor forward the recommendation to the faculty senate Committee on Privilege and Tenure. A special panel will then conduct hearings on the matter and make a recommendation to the president on whether grounds for dismissal are supported.


Another committee found Churchill guilty of research misconduct and another panel recommended that he be fired because of "repeated and deliberate" infractions of scholarship rules.

Churchill's attorney promptly called a news conference Monday afternoon to announce that his client does intend to appeal to the tenure committee. He also mentioned going to court.

Churchill, who ignited a firestorm by calling some of the World Trade Center victims "little Eichmanns" in an essay he wrote after Sept. 11, 2001, has vowed to sue the school if he was fired.

"We're going to a real court because we can trust juries to do the right thing," said Churchill's attorney David Lane. "Churchill says this all completely bogus. Let's see if a jury and a Federal District Court agrees with the committee. Or see if everything that's happened here is retaliation for Ward Churchill's First Amendment free speech relating to 9/11."

The tenured professor of ethnic studies has repeatedly denied all accusations of misconduct.

He told The Associate Press in mid-June, "The basic situation here is that there was a call by high officials in the state, notably the governor but hardly restricted to the governor, for my termination clear back last February, whether or not it was legal. They were willing to take the heat and go to court if necessary to stand behind an illegitimate investigation."

When his essay was brought to light in January 2005, Gov. Bill Owens, state lawmakers and relatives of Sept. 11, 2001 victims in New York immediately denounced it. University officials concluded Churchill could not be fired for the essay, but in March 2005 they launched an investigation into allegations of plagiarism and other research misconduct.

"A committee last year began to look at his writings including his essay on 9/11," said DiStefano. "We determined his writings were protected under the First Amendment. However, during that process there were allegations of research misconduct."

Last month, an investigative subcommittee concluded that Churchill repeatedly fabricated his research, plagiarized others' work and strayed from the "bedrock principles of scholarship."

While one expects the leftists and Churchill backers to claim that he's losing his job because of his exercise of free speech, he's being fired because of academic misconduct that undermines the university's mission to provide an education and unethical conduct by a professor.

UPDATE:
The final decision is expected later today. The calls for his being dismissed have grown over the past two years since it was revealed that he engaged in falsifying evidence, plagiarism, and inventing stories in the course of his 'research.'

UPDATE:
Pirate Ballerina is live blogging the developing situation at CU.

UPDATE:
Fixed typo in title and more importantly, note that it is now official. Churchill has been fired from his professorship at the University of Colorado (video and more at Hot Air). Expect him to whine and seethe over the firing, but the proof of his academic misconduct is incontrovertible.

Of course, he'll claim that the university was denying him free speech. Nonsense. He can say whatever he want. He can even say it on the college campus no matter how distasteful it would be. That isn't what got him fired. That only got people to take a closer look at his work, and that closer inspection showed serious discrepancies in his CV and his works.

He can't invent evidence and plagiarize. That got him fired.

UPDATE:
Others blogging his firing from the University of Colorado: Michelle Malkin, Ed Driscoll, and Weasel Zippers.

UPDATE:
Pirate Ballerina is all over this story. Still others weigh in: Sister Toldjah and Gateway Pundit.

UPDATE:
So how is the AP reporting the firing? Well, they headline that “Professor fired for 9/11-Nazi comparison.” Another AP report states "Colorado Prof Fired After 9-11 Comments." Even Drudge gets the story conflated, where he posts: "Professor Ward Churchill Fired After 9-11 Remarks... " The stories themselves do note that he was fired for academic misconduct, not his outrageous comments about 9/11.

British Wacademics Seek Boycott of Israel

These wacademics are wholly owned subsidiaries of moral equivalence parallel university.com:

Britain’s University and College Union (UCU), comprising of university academics, voted in favour of considering a boycott of Israeli academics and institutions at its conference in Bournemouth on Thursday evening.

The resolution, passed by 158 votes in favor and 99 against, “notes that Israel’s 40-year occupation has seriously damaged the fabric of Palestinian society through annexation, illegal settlement, collective punishment and restriction of movement... deplores the denial of educational rights for Palestinians by invasions, closures, checkpoints, curfews, and shootings and arrests of teachers, lecturers and students.”

UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said after the vote: “I do not believe a boycott is supported by the majority of UCU members... Today’s motion on boycott means all branches now have a responsibility to consulate all of their members on the issue... Any future calls for a boycott must pass key tests before a boycott can be implemented.”

That they equate Israel's defense and sovereign rights to defend themselves against terrorist attacks with those who perpetuate the terrorism shows they lack the firing synapses to differentiate right from wrong.

And note that they never once raised their voice to complain about the incessant calls by Palestinian leaders to destroy Israel. Haniyeh, Meshaal and other Hamas leaders regularly call for Israel's destruction. They teach their kids to hate Israel. They publish texts that call for Israel's destruction. They produce maps that show Palestine existing where Israel once was. They call for genocide and support terrorism against Israel.

All that gets nothing but silence.

All their actions succeed in doing is give aid and comfort to terrorists. Nice.

UPDATE:
The NYT has an article that includes some information about academics who have decided to boycott the British for even considering the boycott:

Some, of course, find such talk contemptible. Prof. Steven Weinberg, an American Nobel laureate in physics from the University of Texas at Austin, canceled a visit to Imperial College, London, after the National Union of Journalists’ action.

“I know that some will say that these boycotts are directed only against Israel, rather than generally against Jews,” he said in a letter to the British college setting out his reasons for canceling the trip, which had been planned for July. “But given the history of the attacks on Israel and the oppressiveness and aggressiveness of other countries in the Middle East and elsewhere, boycotting Israel indicated a moral blindness for which it is hard to find any explanation other than anti-Semitism.”

Professor Weinberg’s letter was published in The Guardian.

It's unfortunate that his opinion is in the minority. Not enough academics are speaking out against this nonsense.

Fire the Fraud

Ward Churchill, the University of Colorado professor who plagiarized texts and made obnoxious comments about the 9/11 attacks and their victims should be fired.

The president of the University of Colorado has recommended that a professor who likened some September 11 victims to a Nazi should be fired, according to the professor and the school.

Ward Churchill, a tenured professor of ethnic studies, has denied the allegations and threatened a lawsuit if he is dismissed.

CU President Hank Brown made the recommendation in a 10-page letter sent to the chair of the committee that handles tenure issues. University spokeswoman Michele McKinney confirmed published reports about the recommendation Monday but said the school would not make the letter public.

The university's governing Board of Regents would have the final say on whether Churchill is fired or disciplined. It could be several weeks before the case ends up in its hands; the tenure panel must review it first.

Churchill touched off a firestorm with an essay likening some victims in the World Trade Center to Adolf Eichmann, who helped carry out the Holocaust.

University officials concluded he could not be fired for his comments because they were protected by the First Amendment, but they launched an investigation into allegations that he fabricated or falsified his research and plagiarized.

To me, it isn't the 9/11 comments that should get him fired. It's the academic fraud he's engaged in for years that form the basis for firing him.

As the earlier investigation determined:

Another committee found Churchill guilty of research misconduct and another panel recommended that he be fired because of "repeated and deliberate" infractions of scholarship rules.

Such conduct cannot be tolerated at an academic institution since intellecutal honesty and academic pursuits are based upon the honesty and veracity of the researchers and academics. Allowing Churchill to remain at the University undermines the University's goals, mission, and credibility.

UPDATE:
Hot Air wonders what it will actually take to get him fired considering that this isn't the first call by those associated with the University for him to be fired.

Jim McGreevey: Ethics Professor?

James E. McGreevey, who resigned the governorship under a cloud of scandal, has a new job teaching law, ethics and leadership at one of New Jersey's public colleges.

McGreevey is now an "executive in residence" -- a combination teaching and consulting post -- at Kean University in Union, where he is earning $17,500. The former governor came on board without any announcement on Nov. 1, Kean officials said, and the university makes no mention of his role on its Web site or faculty directory.

Are you kidding me? This is a governor who engaged in highly unethical behavior, including pushing for a wholly unqualified close associate to become the New Jersey Homeland Security Director, despite the fact that the person wasn't even a US citizen.

Kean University charges $7,500 for in state undergraduate tuition. You aren't getting your money's worth if the university believes that McGreevey is qualified to teach any course on ethics or leadership particularly when he showed extremely poor judgment and no leadership skills in running the state of New Jersey.

CCNY Still Having Sign Problems

Last year, there were a series of stories about how a community center room at the flagship campus of the City College of New York was named after two terrorists. I wrote two pieces (here and here) about it.

The sign was taken down after it was pointed out, and the university moved quickly to clarify its policies on naming spaces on its campuses.

Well, it seems that the sign is back. The detestable Rep. Charles Barron is behind the latest sign re-placement. He vows to continue placing the sign with the names of the two convicted terrorists back on the community room. Good luck with that.

City Councilman Charles Barron considers Thomas Jefferson a "slave-owning pedophile."

So perhaps it shouldn't be any surprise that the former Black Panther restored a controversial City College sign honoring two fugitives, most notably Assata Shakur, a fellow Black Panther convicted of killing a cop and making terrorist bombs.

"We are here to say to the City University that we have a right to self-determination, that we have a right to free speech, that we have a right to freedom of expression," Barron said. "We are saying that you can't determine who our heroines and heroes are going to be."

All that does is show that he has no problem with naming university property after terrorists, despite the fact that only the university has the right to name spaces on its campus. Did I mention that Barron is detestable?

Gothamist notes:

Morales and Shakur, both CCNY alums one-time students, are both living abroad after escaping custody/prison and are wanted by the authorities. Morales was a bomb maker (one bomb at the Fraunces Tavern killed four) for the Armed Forces of National Liberation and Shakur was convicted of killing a NJ State trooper in 1973; much has been made about whether Shakur actually fired a gun.

City College had agreed to open the student center in 1990, but when CCNY student Sergey Kadinsky sent a letter to the Daily News this past December asking why the sign was up, a tempest was born. City College at first said they were keeping the sign.... then explained a few days later - after much outrage from victims' families and others - that the sign would be coming down. Why? Because the school never officially approved the sign back in 1990! Clearly, the other unspoken reason is that it's hard to justify state funds for a community center named after fugitives.

City College students and alumni have sued the school for violating First Amendment rights by taking down the sign.

Oh, I can't wait for that suit to wend its way through the system. Imagine the mayhem that a ruling in favor of the students could create.

Columbia University Considers Disciplinary Action on Speech Fracas

Columbia University is about ready to identify seven students who crashed a debate at the university on border security.

Columbia University has identified seven students who could face disciplinary charges for rushing the stage and preventing the leader of an anti-illegal immigrant group from giving a speech on campus last October.

Six students were informed last month they face penalties for disrupting the Oct. 4 speech of Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist, who was forced to leave the stage after the incident.

Columbia spokesman Robert Hornsby said yesterday a seventh student was recently identified.

It is unclear if any more students could face disciplinary action.

Columbia's student newspaper, The Spectator, yesterday published a Jan. 7 letter received by one of the students.

"I have received a complaint from a member of the University that you may have engaged in conduct that violation sections . . . of the Rules of University Conduct by participating in a demonstration," the letter from the Office of Rules Administrator said.

Universities are supposed to be places where ideas are able to be aired and debated. These students sought to shut down an opposing viewpoint, not with debate, but with violence. The university's slow motion disciplinary action serves absolutely no one on the campus and sends the wrong messages to the student body.

Falling Apart at the Seams

The Duke case continues to circle the drain as the accuser's story changes with every telling, and now 60 Minutes has an interview that will air Sunday with the forensic expert involved in the case who admits that there are serious errors in how the evidence was handled.

The forensic expert hired by the prosecutor in the Duke rape case says he made a "big error" in judgment by not stating in his report that the only DNA he found on the accuser was from several men who were not on the Duke lacrosse team.

Dr. Brian Meehan speaks with 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl in his first interview about the controversial case this Sunday, Jan. 14, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

Meehan acknowledged that he has never omitted potentially exculpatory evidence before. "We haven't done that before," he tells Stahl. "In retrospect, I should have done a better job of conveying that information."

Meehan has stated that he told the prosecutor, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, about the other DNA for the first time in mid-April. Later that same month, Nifong indicted three Duke lacrosse players. Meehan has also said in court proceedings that he and Nifong agreed before the evidence tests were completed that his report should be limited to positive matches between the accuser and the players at the team party where she says she was sexually assaulted last March.

While those who have been following the case have known this for the better part of a month, that the story is getting wider play can only increase the focus on Nifong's actions and push this sad chapter in prosecutorial misconduct to a close. KC Johnson calls Meehan hapless. I'd call him a weasel, because he chose not to do the right thing from the outset and instead let Nifong lead him down this sad road.

Also, KC points out ongoing problems with Nifong's case relating to Colin Finnerty, who does not match any of the supposed psuedonyms used by the accuser. Considering that the accuser has said that Reade Seligmann did not engage in any sexual acts towards her, this already flimsy case is getting worse by the day.

Liestoppers doesn't mince words, calling the situation a hoax. LaShawn Barber calls this the latest version of the accuser's gang rape fantasy.

The thing is that Nifong had a duty to investigate the claims, but when the DNA evidence showed that the three defendants did not leave traces on the accuser, Nifong had the legal obligation to produce exculpatory evidence and to dismiss the charges when it became apparent that the accuser could not keep her story straight. That he has dragged his feet on dismissing charges and withholding evidence from the defense is blatant prosecutorial misconduct and must be addressed by the North Carolina Bar (which is currently investigating the matter).

UPDATE:
A Duke University professor resigned to protest the University allowing two of the three students back into the university (the third student graduated). Forget the way the University acted first, throwing the students out without even waiting for a trial, and when the DA's case started falling apart, realized that they had serious egg on their face and reversed the decision. Never mind the whole judicial process, this professor had their mind already made up.

UPDATE:
Ah, the joys of a Friday night news dump. ABC News has learned that Nifong has sent a letter to the North Carolina Attorney General seeking to recuse himself from the case. That's the absolute least that Nifong should be doing here. His handling of the case should be an object lesson to all prosecutors on what not to do in a case.

istrict Attorney Mike Nifong has requested that he have himself removed from prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse rape investigation, ABC News has learned.

A source close to the investigation said Nifong sent a letter to North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper asking his office to assume responsibility of the case. Calls to the Attorney General's office and Mike Nifong's office were not yet returned.

Three Duke Lacrosse players, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans were indicted in 2006 on charges of rape, sexual assault, and kidnapping.

The rape charges were dropped in December after the accuser could not recall key details of the alleged attack.

UPDATE:
Randy Barnett, a former prosecutor, takes a closer look at the imploding case and credits the defense team for pushing matters in this direction. He also notes that many of the problems with this case stem from the politicized nature of Nifong's approach to the case.

UPDATE:
KC Johnson notes that only Nifong could recuse himself from the case:

"Under North Carolina law, as we all have learned, only the DA himself can recuse himself from a case. Significantly, the Nifong request removes his entire office from the case--including Linwood Wilson, or any of the ADA's who could be subjected to pressure from Nifong to try the case regardless of evidence."

Rusty thinks that the countdown to counter suits by the accused commences shortly. I would think that the defense team is already looking at that. Others weighing in on the latest news about Nifong seeking to recuse himself from the case and other related aspects: Outside the Beltway, Don Surber, Blue Crab Boulevard, Protein Wisdom, and Liestoppers.

Technorati: duke rape case, duke, nifong, lacrosse.

Pace University Strong Arms Hillel

Another perfect example of free speech on college campuses, as well as Islam's inability to accept or hear critizism of itself.

January 9, 2007 -- Pace University administrators threatened to sic the cops on a Jewish-student club if it went ahead with plans to screen a critically acclaimed film about radical Islam, the head of the group charged yesterday.

Michael Abdurakhmanov, president of Pace Hillel, said two deans warned that showing the documentary film would implicate club members as suspects in two hate crimes involving the desecration of the Koran at the university's lower-Manhattan campus last fall.

In addition, Abdurakhmanov said an assistant dean physically restrained him as he attempted to defend the film and his group in a meeting with administrators.

"The message was pretty clear, if you show this film, you're going to incriminate yourself," Abdurakhmanov said.

Pace spokesman Chris Cory acknowledged that officials encouraged Hillel to postpone the screening until tensions over the hate crimes dissipated, but dismissed the accusations of coercion as "far-fetched," "implausible" and "unprofessional."

Hillel had planned to screen "Obsession" during Judaism Awareness Week in November. The school stepped in after receiving complaints from Muslim students that the film negatively portrayed Islam.

In September and October, copies of the Koran were found in toilets in men's rooms on the Manhattan campus. Those incidents were followed by the discovery of a swastika scrawled on a bathroom wall and a Hillel event poster.

Abdurakhmanov, a 20-year-old psychology major from Brooklyn, said neither he nor any member of his club had reason to believe they were suspects in the Koran incidents until the dean of students, Marijo Russell O'Grady, suggested it.

"Her words were if you show this film, the police will be looking into your records further," Abdurakhmanov said.

He added that he knew of no one who had been contacted by the NYPD's Hate Crime Task Force. An NYPD spokesman declined to say whether there were any suspects in the cases.

In a second meeting with university administrators, Abdurakhmanov claims an assistant dean, David Clark, twice pushed him into a seat when he tried to stand to speak.

I am sure if a group wanted to show The Passion of the Christ the school would have no problem letting them show it. This is another example of academia being hijacked by radical Islam, and stifling free speech. Instead of threatening Hillel (which I was a founding member of at SUNY Oneonta), the school could have provided follow events presenting the alternate side. Instead of embracing free speech and the free exchange of ideas, the school would rather threaten criminal sanctions on baseless charges. If the school has evidence that any member of Hillel committed a hate crime than come out with it. Do not threaten investigations and charges against students for participating in legitimate events.

Showdown Threatened At City College

In a story I noted yesterday, student groups are threatening a showdown with City College officials after an observant student noticed that a community room was named after two convicted criminals, Assata Shakur, who was convicted of killing a New Jersey state trooper, and the other was Guillermo Morales, who was involved with the FALN terrorist group and escaped from Belleview Hospital while being treated for injuries sustained when a bomb he was working on blew up in his face. Both are now believed to be in Cuba after escaping the country.

The NY Daily News reports (and which Ellis Simon posted here last nite), the City College did not sanction the naming of the room and will be taking steps to remove the name from the room.

The Daily News story further notes:

CUNY Chancellor Matthew Goldstein quickly ordered the sign taken down, saying school trustees never approved it. "We are going to ask [students] to remove it themselves, and if they do not, then we will take appropriate steps," said City College spokesman Ellis Simon.

The center is a gathering spot for left-wing students, decorated with pictures of Che Guevara and angry slogans about President Bush and the war in Iraq.

"I don't know what all the fuss is about," said English literature major Alicia Roberts, 24. "The administration's trying to appease people who might be angry. I was listening to other students talk about it, and nobody seems bothered by it."

But senior Sergey Kadinsky, 22, who first made an issue of the name on campus, said he was pleased by the change.

"Killing a police officer and escaping from prison does not make someone worthy of having a room named after them," Kadinsky said. "Let them tell the family of Werner Foerster she's a good example for students."

Roberts may think no one else is bothered by it because no one knows who the room was named after. Once more people become aware of that fact, you might get a slightly different reaction.

Technorati: pataki, bloomberg, ccny, city college, shakur, morales.

A Teachable Moment

The City College of New York wants to honor a fugitive who murdered a New Jersey State Trooper.

These days, Joanne Chesimard is known as Assata Shakur, but she's had dozens of other aliases in a life on the run.
She now lives in Cuba, a guest of dictator Fidel Castro, and carries a $1 million price tag for her capture and return to prison in the U.S.

She's a convicted cop killer who left behind a lifetime of pain for the family of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster.

But in at least one corner of City College, Chesimard is a hero, honored and remembered.

She gets a building named after one of her nom de guerres. She was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, but was freed in a brazen prison break. She shares the naming rights with another convicted terrorist who was a member of the FALN, who also managed to break out of custody while being treated at Belleview Hospital for injuries sustained when a bomb he was working on blew off his fingers. He too is living in Cuba.

Ward Churchill gave a speech last nite at the New School in NYC, and was received with a standing ovation.

In a two-hour speech at the New School titled "Sterilizing History: The Fabrication of Innocent Americans," delivered without notes, Mr. Churchill traced what he called a pattern of mass murder as American foreign policy from the time of the country's inception to the events of September 11, 2001, which he said the country was essentially asking for.

Mr. Churchill also called the president of the New School, Robert Kerrey, a former senator of Nebraska, a "mass murder and serial killer to boot" for having served in Thanh Phong, Vietnam. Mr. Churchill also served in Vietnam, an act for which he said he has spent the rest of his life apologizing.

Mr. Churchill received cheers from the audience for comparing Mr. Kerrey to the serial killer Charles Manson. "That's who you've got moral equivalency in the president's chair at this institution," Mr. Churchill said. "How about a cage rather than a president's suite?"

Mr. Churchill was invited to the New School by a student group, the Women of Color. The university was not involved in the invitation.

"We brought him here because he offers a framework in which we can conceptualize the struggles our community is dealing with," a junior at the New School, Jamila Thompson, said. "A person's work should be engaged critically, and his work allows us to build broad-based networks with Native Americans, Latinos, and anti-racist whites."

Never mind the fact that Churchill was a fraud and whose comments were being made less than 2 miles from Ground Zero where 2,749 people were murdered by Islamic terrorists. He even managed to get a standing ovation attacking Kerrey because of his service to the nation.

Then, there's the French movement to honor another cop-killer, Mumia Abu Jamal, who killed Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner 25 years ago. That somehow qualifies him to have a street named after him in Paris.

What do all these incidents have in common? These are causes célèbres among the leftists and Hollywood elites. All are leftists honoring leftists who not only make excuses for violent acts, but in two of the cases, actually killed members of law enforcement and were convicted for their crimes.

In Churchill's case, he was found to be an academic fraud whose comments on 9/11 are not only outlandish, but revolting and nonsensical all at the same time. He blames the victims for the 9/11 attacks and excuses the Islamists who did carry out the attacks.

Not only is the moral equivalency appalling and pervasive, but supporters engage in revisionist history to whitewash the facts and circumstances of the incidents in the first place. Indeed, the CCNY officials claim that she was nothing more than a black-activist who was arrested on trumped up charges. The New Jersey State Troopers, and the judicial system, see things quite differently.

UPDATE:
Fixed typo above.

UPDATE:
New York Magazine notes that some are less than thrilled at the CCNY building naming. Really? Can't imagine much of an outcry from the halls of academia. Oh wait, you're referring to law enforcement and anyone else who bothered to look at the history of the people that CCNY decided to honor with the building naming. Others taking note of CCNY's efforts to honor a convicted cop killer and terrorist who remains a fugitive from the law: Ace of Spades, Black Informant, JammieWearingFool, and Ari's Blog.

As a counter to those who have their head screwed on straight, I point you in this direction (where cops are pigs and convicted cop-killers are freedom fighters).

UPDATE:
Sister Toldjah weighs in on the situation at CCNY and the Ward Churchill speech at New School. FoxNews has a statement from the student group that put the name on the community center at CCNY, and they're standing by their decision to honor Shakur; proclaiming her innocence. Sorry, but a court of law found her guilty. She escaped prison - another criminal act, and has been a fugitive ever since. Some of those blogs defending this nonsense claim that the media outlets and PBAs are simply trying to divert attention from the series of police involved shootings, including the incident where Sean Bell was killed in a hail of gunfire (that investigation continues). Kowabunga sees the inmates running the asylum at CCNY.

UPDATE:
I am reprinting the comment posted associated with this entry here - it clarifies some of the facts in the CCNY situation and was posted by the Director of Public Relations for the City College of New York, Ellis Simon. It also corrects an assertion I had made in stating that it was a building named after Shakur when it was only one room within the building:

I am the director of public relations for The City College of New York. For the record, no building at City College is named for these two individuals; it is a room inside a building that carries their name, not that this makes it any less grevious.

The naming was done over 15 years ago by students with the organizations that occupy the room.

However, all designations and namings of facilities at colleges with in the CUNY (City University of New York) system, of which City College is a part, must be approved by the University's Board of Trustees.

There is no record of such approval ever having been granted. Hence, the naming is unauthorized and City College is moving expeditiously to take the appropriate steps to dismantle this unauthorized and inappropriate signage.

FoxNews is now reporting (no link yet) that the student groups will try to block the CCNY efforts to remove the signage.

Noam Chomsky's Rantings Behind Arizona 9/11 Memorial Blatherings?

Chomsky is a professor of linquistics at MIT, and not a cunning one at that. He made his name opposing the war in Vietnam and has been living off the reputation ever since.

He has no speciality in international affairs or Middle East politics, and if you can get through more than 20 pages of his writings without your eyes glazing over, it's a tremendous accomplishment. Yet, the Left reveres him, mostly based on that opposition to the Vietnam conflict.

Chomsky is a virulent anti-American, and sides with the enemies of the US time and time again. That he was considered source material for the memorial shows just how far off base the AZ memorial commission was.

It also shows that NYers were justified in making sure that the IFC and The Drawing Center was tossed from the Ground Zero rebuilding plans because they too were from the same well of anti-American thought.

Prior coverage is here.

HT: Charles at LGF

UPDATE:
Flopping Aces weighs in on the latest news about the Chomsky effect. He's not amused. Nor surprised.

Castro Burn in Hell (great name for a blog) points out the difference between a good memorial and a bad one. The Arizona memorial is a bad one. The good? It's the new USAF Memorial near Arlington National Cemetery, and would mean that every service now has a memorial of its own.

Blog o Fascists also comments. So does Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.

Technorati: arizona memorial, WTC, 9/11, urban policy, murdoch, nps, shanksville, memorial, shanksville, drawing center, ifc.