I was so much happier when I'd never heard of this Churchill fuckwit.

He sounded to me like he was fanning the flames to get publicity for his upcoming book, and the lawsuit that will result if he gets fired. I hope that universities are taking notice about what a hassle these dangerous nutcases can be to them. But just in case they don't:

THE RIGHT MUST BOYCOTT!!!

We've got all these lawyers sitting around dreaming up frivolous lawsuits. Can't we find one that's patriotic enough to sue this asshole for something?

Zetetic: Good God so was I! I must admit that I'm really getting weary of all this kind of shit. But we must do what we must do, and as Cato said:

THE RIGHT MUST BOYCOTT!!!

Is there anything constructive we can all do, like flooding the servers at UC? Anybody got an address?

Well, not to defend this guy in any way, but I don't think he was "calling for" terrorist attacks. I think he was saying something more along the lines of "Joe just had a heart attack, but he still eats a lot and doesn't excercise, so it might take another one to convince him to lose weight."

In other words:

1) Joe's heart attack was caused by his behavior.
2) His behavior hasn't changed.
3) Therefore, it's likely that he'll have another heart attack, and that might be needed to convince him to make the necessary changes.

Never mind the risk to Joe's life if he has another heart attack; that's beside the point. The main idea, contingent upon accepting the premise that Joe's heart attack was his own fault, is that one instance of direct negative consequences was not enough, perhaps because he hasn't reached the same enlightened plane as Mr. Churchill.

I guess my point is, that's not exactly the same thing as wishing another heart attack on Joe, or "calling for" more terrorist attacks on the U.S. He's just saying that if we, the U.S., don't straighten up and fly right of our own accord, then we're likely to get another 9/11 to "teach us a lesson." As someone else said in the other thread about this, it's intellectually lazy, incredibly narrow-minded, and as shortsightedly hyper-rationalist as it gets... but that's not the same as saying he actually wants another 9/11 to happen.

I still say the best way to go with this guy is to just keep pointing out what a completely talentless hack and fraud he is, rather than trying to get him fired or sued. Give him enough rope, and he'll surely hang himself anyway.

He certainly was justifying the attacks. I'll bet that this kind of Clintonesque Liberal parsing comes second nature to him. He sounds like he's having a great time teasing the cat.

Funny how Liberals have shrieked about "being offensive" to their "special groups" and yet the victims families of 911 are not among them. We hear nothing from the Left, perhaps they agree with him. This was the most offensive, inflamatory, provocative horse shit I've read in awhile.

Mike is right. Churchill is simply trying to use the old 'pain motivates change' argument, but he's doing it in a dumbass way.

Personally, I wish he'd shut up. He's giving liberalism a bad name. Sure, we want to affect change in American foreign policy - but through debate, not tragedy.

Regardless, it makes more sense to label him a dumbass and ignore him, rather than a traitor who deserves to be attacked. I use this approach with Dobson and it works just fine.

It seems to me that we've ignored guys like this too long. I agree that trying to muzzle him by suit or force is the worst option. But we have a right and a duty to express our outrage through the direct action of boycotting the university and their sources of outside funding.

Quote:"he was asked about the effectiveness of protests of U.S. policies and the Iraq war, and responded: "One of the things I've suggested is that it may be that more 9/11s are necessary."

Rephrase the question: Peaceful protests arent changing American Polocy-what will? "One of the things I've suggested is that it may be that more 9/11s are necessary."

At first I thought Mikes "heart attack "analogy was fitting, but it isnt. Churchill isnt saying that America will learn its lesson on its own- he's saying America must be taught a painful lesson. Google some of his writings on Indian rights. I believe he's advocated semi-terrorist acts before.A better analogy would be. "Ali stole some bread. We cut off Alis hand. Ali continues to steal bread. I think the only way to stop Ali is to cut off his other hand. " Churchill doesnt want to change the minds of the American people- he wants to punish them.

I don't know, I think this guy is doing this for the attention. Fire him for his fraudulent credentials and never talk about him again. But I don't think he gives "Progressives" a bad name. I think he gives them an accurate name.

If Churchill so eager for another attack to "wake" America up how about he sacrifaces himself first. You know let a few "freedom fighters" show us the oppression we and Mr. Churchill are subjecting them to.

We can't ignore this guy - he won't let us! Just read
he's speaking tommorrow at UC. He seems to be enjoying all this turmoil mightily and expects to profit hugely from it: the more outrageous his statements the more publicity he gets, the more publicity he gets the more book sales and on and on. To break this cycle of rewarding people like him with money and celebrity the more outrageous they get will the require that the profit motive be taken out of it by boycotting the university, their outside sources, and the book publisher.

I just wonder how damaging he really is. I think most Americans hear Churchill and see right through him.

If anything, liberals should be working to discredit him. His rhetoric only serves to strengthen the misconception of people like PlacidPundit that associate the entire progressive movement with the lunatic rantings of one man.

I'd be all for another 9/11 if the building was filled with just Churchill and his ilk. I could do with a whole bunch of painful lessons like that.

It used to be you'd walk up and deck a guy like this and he'd shut up and common sense would prevail. But now we're all touchy feely and where a bloody nose would've solved the problem, now we've got to go through all these encounter groups and respect sessions. Well I got news for ya, you don't respect horsehit, you clean it up and toss it out.

His rhetoric only serves to strengthen the misconception of people like PlacidPundit that associate the entire progressive movement with the lunatic rantings of one man.

Ever been to democraticunderground.com? The Daily Kos? Any anti-war protest? Anywhere in Southern California?

I've got headline news for ya, pal: there are a whole heck of a lot of people like Mr. Churchill out there. The only difference is that most of them actually believe in this tripe, while Churchill is just an opportunist.