WorldNetDaily: Is prof under fire really an Indian?

That turns out to be a (censored) good question! Turns out that the American Indian Movement kicked him out after they decided that he was not an Indian at all, but--and I quote WorldNetDaily--"a white man masquerading as an Indian."

Why is this relevant? Because in his blurb to that nutty essay of his, the one that has caused all the excitement (and threatens his job, tenure or no), he said he was an Indian. I quote:

Ward Churchill (Keetoowah Band Cherokee) is one of the most outspoken of Native American activists. In his lectures and numerous published works, he explores the themes of genocide in the Americas, historical and legal (re)interpretation of conquest and colonization, literary and cinematic criticism, and indigenist alternatives to the status quo. Churchill is a Professor of Ethnic Studies and Coordinator of American Indian Studies. He is also a past national spokesperson for the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee. His books include Agents of Repression, Fantasies of the Master Race, From a Native Son and A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas.

Except that AIM has "officially called for educators to remove his books from their curricula and libraries." Now how often does a lefty tell another lefty that a third lefty's books are so bad that they should be pulled off the library bookshelves? Ray Bradbury, call your agent!

FIRE CAPTAIN BEATTY: And the philosophers--they're even worse than the novels! All of them saying the same thing: "I'm right! And everyone else is wrong!"

Book-burning calls aside, AIM said this of Churchill:

We request that organizations such as the National Indian Education Association and the American Indian Higher Education Consortium create a watchdog-type agency to review what books are being published by these literary, academic, and Indian frauds so that their revisionist writings are not finding their way into our education curriculum. This problem is of epidemic proportions, and must be stopped.

Now I admit: I missed this when it came out. The AIM has never struck me as a reasonable organization. So you know that Ward Churchill made some bitter--B-I-T-T-E-R--political enemies at AIM.

But to the AIM I would say: Your statement is truer than you know--and the full truth might not be flattering even to you. I wish the educational establishment would take you up on the challenge to establish a committee of standards, so that goo and drivel does not routinely get published strictly on the strength of the credentials, real or fabricated, of their authors. Even a real full-blooded Cherokee can produce trash--after all, no law of nature says he can't. And the real problem is that the two sides of the political debate can't even agree on the facts of history anymore. So why are we surprised at loudmouths like Ward Churchill?

And for that matter, why are you so afraid of him? Could it be that even you realized that he had crossed a line that you dared not cross, nor let anyone else cross in your names? Where was that line, I wonder?

Ah, well, I must give credit where it's due--they did denounce this man as a strutting pretender way back before the Campaign of 2000, so it's not as if they're trying to cover their tracks after that disgusting essay of his gained national attention. But that's enough to make me ask how he managed to get tenure--and why is it so easy to get tenure by publishing not only trash, but a tissue of lies?