Did He Really Say That?
Colo. Regents Weigh Prof's 9/11 Comments.
You can read the full essay that sparked the controvery here. Aside from being extremely poorly written - nearly incoherent, in fact - what did the, ahem, learned professor of Ethnic Studies write that got the overlords so upset? Oh, not much, really. Well, ok, maybe something really ignorant and bizzare. How about this excerpt, for example:
There is simply no argument to be made that the Pentagon personnel killed on September 11 fill that bill [of being innocent civilians]. The building and those inside comprised military targets, pure and simple. As to those in the World Trade Center . . .Yup, you read right. The victims of the World Trade Center terrorist attack had it coming, you see. They were Little Eichmanns. Little Eichmanns, he calls them. Nazis. The victims of that attack, who were from nearly one hundred diffirent nationalities, Christian, Muslim, Arab, Jew, Asian and African - and probably Native American, like the professor - were all Nazis. Well. We can all pray together that the Almighty may have mercy on his tortured soul.
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.
While I recognize he may be virtually untouchable, given his tenure and all, and that he has a right to express his political views, why does the public have to pay for his right to do so? And what were the Regents and Faculty thinking by granting such a goofball tenure AND making him Department Chair? Talk about the chickens coming home to roost, indeed. Just because his position as professor is secure doesn't mean he should not be subjected to deserved ridicule and reprimand in the arena of public opinion. And he'd be strongly advised whenever in New York City to not ever need the services of the NYPD or the NYFD.
Just remember the words of that great American, Forrest Gump: stupid is as stupid does.
(You can read more puerile neo-Marxist nonsense in an interview conducted with the aggrieved professor here. Professor Bainbridge weighed in the subject this past Thursday here. And there's a good post on the subject at Wudndux. Check Technorati for what other Blogs are saying.)