Will Academia defend this? And if so for how long...

[no1tovote4]

On 9/12/2001 this "Professor" (and I use the term loosely) wrote an essay that he published that said that the victims of the WTC attacks were not victims and not innocent. He said that because they worked for US corporations they were "little Eichmanns" (talking about Adolf Eichmann who headed the program to extinguish the lives of all Jews for Hitler).

Here is his essay:
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2003/12/7342.php

Some quotes from the essay:

The reason for this holocaust was/is rather simple, and stated quite straightforwardly by President George Bush, the 41st "freedom-loving" father of the freedom-lover currently filling the Oval Office, George the 43rd: "The world must learn that what we say, goes," intoned George the Elder to the enthusiastic applause of freedom-loving Americans everywhere. How Old George conveyed his message was certainly no mystery to the US public. One need only recall the 24-hour-per-day dissemination of bombardment videos on every available TV channel, and the exceedingly high ratings of these telecasts, to gain a sense of how much they knew.

and

Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly. Recourse to "ignorance" – a derivative, after all, of the word "ignore" – counts as less than an excuse among this relatively well-educated elite. To the extent that any of them were unaware of the costs and consequences to others of what they were involved in – and in many cases excelling at – it was because of their absolute refusal to see. More likely, it was because they were too busy braying, incessantly and self-importantly, into their cell phones, arranging power lunches and stock transactions, each of which translated, conveniently out of sight, mind and smelling distance, into the starved and rotting flesh of infants. If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.

Notice particularly the use of "Holocaust" to describe our actions in 1991 in Iraq, then later "Eichmann" to describe basically anybody at all who works for a US corporation.

Toady in the Denver Post there is this story:
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2678527,00.html


In my opinion this is defamation of the worst kind, insidious too. Most who read his paper never realized that since they too work for a US corporation they are included in this "Eichmann" comparison. Basically everybody in the US, to this person, are the moral equivalent of Adolf Eichmann.

I went on line to reasearch this "Professor" and found that he constantly uses these Nazi comparisons and often appears to be offensive on purpose in order to bait Jewish people specifically.

Now while we do have the 1st Amendment it does not cover defamation of character. Also should we have such repulsive humans teaching our kids? Let alone heading a department at one of our Universities?

How long do you think that this person will be protected by Academia before they realize that some things are not and should not be protected.

This particular article not only compares us all to Eichmann but it also cheers on the attacks as clearly, in his mind, the moral high ground belongs to the terrorists. Is it legal to promote murder? It is free speech?

 

[CSM]

As these aprticular brands of professor become more and more visible, they tend to drift out of acedamia and into punditry, and once that happens, they are soon exposed as buffoons...seems that way to me anyway