Professor Fired After Calling 9/11 Victims "Little Eichmanns"

By Anastacia Mott Austin

Controversial University of Colorado Ethnic Studies professor Ward Churchill was fired yesterday after the university’s board of regents found him guilty of charges of plagiarism and falsification of research.

Churchill first became known to the press after his essay about 9/11, titled, "Some People Push Back – On the Justice of Roosting Chickens," received attention from another professor in New York. Though written soon after the 9/11 attacks, the essay only came to light after he was invited to speak in 2005 at Hamilton College in New York and a professor there complained about the essay.

The essay argued that people working at businesses housed at the World Trade Center were participating in the murder of innocent Iraqi civilians just by being employed by US companies who profited from our country’s involvement in the Middle East, and that the 9/11 attacks were simply the desperate acts of individuals who could not take any more.

Concerning the 9/11 attackers, Churchill wrote, "That they waited so long to do so is, notwithstanding the 1993 action at the WTC, more than anything a testament to their patience and restraint."

About employees at the WTC, he said, "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." As such, claimed Churchill, they were military targets, not innocent civilians.

Churchill then compared these workers to "little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers."

A firestorm of protest erupted once the contents of Churchill’s essay were made public, with demands for his firing. Then-governor of New York George Pataki said that the essay was "evil and inflammatory," and Colorado’s governor at the time, Bill Owens, was one of those who demanded Churchill’s dismissal.

The University of Colorado’s board of regents met and refused to fire Churchill at the time, claiming that it fell under the protections of free speech under the First Amendment. However, the publicity generated by the essay and complaints from other professors prompted an investigation into allegations that Churchill had falsified facts in his classes and plagiarized research.

It was these charges that prompted his firing this week, insist the university officials, not the controversial 2005 essay.

"The decision was really pretty basic," said University of Colorado president Hank Brown, speaking to reporters. "The individual did not express regret, did not apologize, did not indicate a willingness to refrain from this type of falsification in the future."

But Churchill has vowed to fight back, saying his firing was clearly related to the essay. He said to the press, "I am going nowhere," and has promised to sue the university. He also wanted to clarify to the public that in using the term, "little Eichmanns," he did not mean the children, maintenance workers, or passersby who were killed on 9/11.

Churchill’s attorney, David Lane, called the decision an attack on free speech. Said Lane to reporters, "It sends a message out to the academic community generally that if you stick your neck out and make politically inflammatory comments, you will be dragged through the mud for two years and you will ultimately have your tenure terminated."