Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
How close is the analogy? Close enough to be instructive?

---

Quote:

---

Gannongate: It's worse than you think
Feb. 23, 2005 | When the press first raised questions about why Jim Guckert had been awarded access to the White House press room for two years running while he worked for Talon News, critics charged that Talon, with its amateurish standards and close working ties to Republican activists, did not qualify as a legitimate news organization. It turns out the truth is even stranger: Guckert was waved into the White House while working for an even more blatantly partisan organization, GOPUSA.
White House press secretary Scott McClellan originally told reporters that Guckert was properly allowed into press briefings because he worked for an outlet that "published regularly." But that's when the questions were about Talon. More recently McClellan offered up a new rationale. Asked by Editor and Publisher magazine how the decision was made to allow a GOPUSA correspondent in, McClellan said, "The staff assistant went to verify that the news organization existed." (Emphasis added.)
That, apparently, was the lone criterion the press office used when Guckert (aka Jeff Gannon) approached it in February 2003 seeking a pass for White House briefings. Not yet working for Republican-friendly Talon News, which came into existence in April 2003, Guckert, using an alias and with no journalism experience whatsoever, was writing on a voluntary basis for a Web site dedicated to promoting Republican issues. To determine whether Guckert would gain entrance to the press room, normally reserved for professional journalists working for legitimate, recognized and independent news organizations, the press office simply logged on to the Internet and confirmed that GOPUSA "existed," and then quickly approved Guckert's access. In a White House obsessed, at least publicly, with security and where journalists cannot even move between the White House and the nearby Old Executive Building without a personal escort, Guckert's lenient treatment was likely unprecedented.
....
Unlike Guckert, though, Kinsolving has an authentic background in journalism, having worked for the San Francisco Chronicle and the Indianapolis Star. Talon's defenders suggest that it too is a legitimate news outlet. But providing some insight into how it operates, Eberle told the New York Times last week that he rarely monitored Guckert's White House work. "Jeff did his thing. I did my thing," Eberle said. In other words, it appears that Guckert, who often cut and pasted White House press releases and posted them on Talon as "news," did not even have an editor. As Media Matters for America noted, Talon "apparently consists of little more than Eberle, Gannon, and a few volunteers."
Just how blatantly the White House press office looked the other way in regard to Guckert and his dubious status as a legitimate reporter comes into stark relief when examining his attempt to secure a similar press pass to cover Capitol Hill. Guckert submitted his application in December 2003 to the Standing Committee of Correspondents, a press group in charge of handing out credentials. In April 2004, the committee denied Guckert's request. Writing to Guckert, committee chairman Jim Drinkard outlined three clear deficiencies in Guckert's application:
1) "Committee guidelines require that on-line publications 'must charge a market rate fee for subscription or access, or carry paid advertising at current market rates.' You have not demonstrated to the committee's satisfaction that Talon News has any paid subscribers, that paid client newspapers publish Talon News stories, or that it is supported by advertising."
2) "The application for accreditation to the press galleries states that 'members of the press shall not engage in lobbying or paid advertising, publicity, promotion, work for any individual, political party, corporation, organization, or agency of the Federal Government.' Talon News has not demonstrated to the satisfaction of the committee that there is a separation from GOPUSA."
3) "Gallery rules and the application state that the principal income of correspondents must be obtained from news correspondence intended for publication in newspapers or news services. The committee feels that paying a single reporter a 'stipend' does not meet the intent of the rule."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
As I understand it, Churchill said some unpopular things and the right-wing vigilantes decided to make an example of him, not by debating the issues, but by digging up dirt.

---

Quote:

---

Bait and switching by bringing up irrelevent issues doesn't really get us anywhere.

---

Quote:

---

Never mind issues of 'free speech', this clown seems to have used fraud and deception to attain a position that wasn't ever meant for him. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:08
Did he get his positon on false pretenses ? Yes or no? It doesn't have to be solely on his minority status, but any favoritism he might have received which he didn't deserve warrents investigating. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 13:20
He's claimed a false heritage and it landed him a $100,000 + tenured position. Not bad work, if you can find it. Friday, February 25, 2005 - 04:58
That IF WC lied about his heritage , and because of that lie, his classification as a minority in any way helped him obtain his position, then it's well with in C.U. right to fire this guy. Sunday, February 27, 2005 - 05:06
People go to jail for lying, Presidents get impeached for lying, and football coaches at Notre Dame lose their job for lying. Thats what. Sunday, February 27, 2005 - 14:57

---

Quote:

---

Considering the idiotic things this clown has said, I find it hard to believe that he could have made it through the system without considerable hand waiving. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 20:42
He's a fruitcake. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 22:12
I think that if he acquired his position through fraud and that can be determined, then I think he should be dismissed immediately. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 23:06

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Finn, Finn, Finn,

I see you've abandoned your statements. Didn't even address them when you should have defended them. Assuming of course you posted something you believed in..

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
But, it's apparent that your REAL issue is not with how he got his job - that was just a throw-away position of nominal support for the baying vigilante breeds. You're issue is with what Churchill says. You have a problem with free speech.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
As I understand it, Churchill said some unpopular things and the right-wing vigilantes decided to make an example of him, not by debating the issues, but by digging up dirt.

---

Yep. That's probably the way you understand it.

---

Quote:

---

fruitcake

---

Quote:

---

if he acquired his position through fraud and that can be determined, then I think he should be dismissed immediately.

---

Quote:

---

Higher education in this country is pretty damn Left-wing, but I can’t believe it’s this stupid. Although I could be wrong, but if this clown is a fair representation of American Academia, we just need to shut down the colleges and start over from scratch. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 20:42

---

Quote:

---

Although, given the lunacy of some of his statements I can certainly understand if the tax payers of Colorado don’t want to pay this guy to teach their children. Wednesday, February 23, 2005 - 23:06

---

Quote:

---

In fact, I believe it no different from hate speech. Saturday, February 26, 2005 - 06:55

---

Quote:

---

But considering how people dismiss and justify fruitcakey comments, and how willing we seem to be to put a person like Churchill in a position where he can implant fruitcakey ideas in impressionable minds ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Finn,

You have rigorous 'job' standards outrage over their violation for Churchill, but not for Guckert. You expressed no perception that Guckert might be a, let's see ...

Quote:

---

fruitcake

---

or that

Quote:

---

if he acquired his position through fraud and that can be determined, then I think he should be dismissed immediately.

---

If hiring-fraud is SO abhorrent to you, where's your outrage and hyperbole over Guckert's fraud? Or are your standards merely ones of convenience?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I don’t know who all is calling for his dismissal. I think that if he acquired his position through fraud and that can be determined, then I think he should be dismissed immediately. Other then that, I’m not going to call for his dismissal based on the kinds of comments he’s made. Although, given the lunacy of some of his statements I can certainly understand if the tax payers of Colorado don’t want to pay this guy to teach their children.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
My point was that Iraq was not a threat to us or to its neighbors. My point still stands, yours doesn't. But just like Bush, you will dance to evade responsibility. Typical. (sigh)

As far as the YOUR analogy goes... What are you trying to say? That Jews were innocent but that Iraqis deserve to die? Unless you tell me otherwise, seems to be your logic. Is it?

---

Quote:

---

RUE
"You can see anything, if you use the right filters ..."

Thursday, March 03, 2005 - 21:35



AURaptor,

Quote:
Bait and switching by bringing up irrelevent issues doesn't really get us anywhere.


Ward Churchill - NOT a Native American? Fire him.

This WAS the title of this thread, wasn't it?
Didn't you then go on to make a bunch of statements repeated over many days about getting jobs under false pretenses? (see below) How is my Guckert posting NOT relevant? You do know he got his 'in' to the press room without being a journalist, don't you?

Just wondering how far you are willing to carry on with an absurdly obvious double standard, that's all.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Me too . That's the way I understand it. If Churchill isn't who he is, then his statements aren't greeted with the same response.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
But I come to this board and what I find is right the opposite. You’re trying to deflect the argument away from Churchill with some thin ‘Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy’ argument. SignyN is outwardly defending Churchill, and Rue is trying to deflect the issue to some Guckert thing while giving me some Orwellian crap about not disagreeing with what Churchill says. Now I don’t believe that any of you actually believe that condoning murder is a good thing(an assumption on my part), so why is it such a difficult thing for us to agree on this matter?

---

Quote:

---

The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth told some pretty damnable lies. So did Bush. So did Guckert. It just doesn't seem to ring any bells with Auraptor that those are consequential lies because THAT'S DIFFERENT (somehow). His emotions are clouding his reason.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I and others already did. You blew past them because they were "irrelevant" or something. Please read previous posts to find the info you requested.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Trying to make a rational point here...

I don't have the full text of what Churchill said, so I can't either defend or castigate it. It may be that what he said was "This is how THEY see it."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
...I've been reading through it (in bits and pieces) and I have to say it does sound like a polemic. I wonder if Churchill might be projecting Indian-American relations onto current affairs a bit much.

It doesn't surprise me that AIM is not a fan of Churchill's. He's definitely one of those people who do not tone down their rhetoric for political expediency.

---

Quote:

---

Ward Churchill tests positive for Indigenous genetic markers.
Posted by: Admin on Tuesday, February 08, 2005 - 02:21 PM
by Ernesto Cienfuegos
La Voz de Aztlan
Los Angeles, Alta California - February 7, 2005 - (ACN) The results of a much awaited ancestry genetic test of embattled American Indian scholar Ward Churchill conclusively proves that the professor of American Indian Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder is in fact of both Creek and Cherokee descent. Professor Churchill has recently been the victim of a campaign of disinformation claiming that he was not a Native American.

---

Quote:

---

Churchill admits he's not a Native American

---

Quote:

---

"I'm not a Native American, I'm an Indian."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Oooh, let me answer for Barstormer.

Because Guckert's lies, which gained him a professional position (White House reporter) is nothing like Churchill's lie, which MIGHT HAVE gained him a professional postion (professor). Because that's DIFFERENT. Guckert is cleaner. Guckert has an upstanding personal history. Guckert is clearly unbiased.

Actually, the interesting thing about Guckert is that he apparently knew things MONTHS in advance of White House annoucements, even months in adavcne of becoming a so-called White House reporter. Nothing like benefitting from a little pillow-talk, eh? So, who in the WH like boy toys, hmmmm? I think that's why the right doesn't want to talk about him.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
CONDI???? Perhaps you haven't heard of Guckert's...er... predelictions? I was picturing Karl Rove; it's much more interesting that way.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BarnStormer:
How come no one will comment on the Churchill Plagarism deal? I mean after all, it included both written essays and works of art. Coupled with threats of violence if his accusers don't keep their mouths shut?

Never mind the 9/11 essay or the dubious ancestry, this turd is disgrace to his supposed profession.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
"The latest story is to try to bring up some journalist who snuck into the Whitehouse. During a discussion about the ‘befittingness’ of mass murder we are supposed to be outraged over some weirdo web blogger as if there is any equivalency at all."

He didn't "sneak" into the White House, he was given clearance as a White House reporter even before he started working for the so-called news publication Talon (which itself is a front for the Republican Party).

As far as Churchill is concerned, you really just want to go after this guy because of WHAT HE SAID, not because of plagarism, or because he said he was an Indian, don't you? You just want to nail this guy for ANY reason. Conversely, it doesn't matter HOW hypocritical the whole Guckert situation is, the guy gets a pass because he's pro-Bush, right? It's called "conlfating" issues- a favorite word of the right, look it up.

If you want to talk about what Churchill said, and you feel he should be nailed for it, fine. But in the meantime, stop presenting this as a plagarism horror story because we all KNOW what your agenda is, and bitching about plagarism just makes you look stupid. Try to disentangle your hidden agendas from your rationalizations and bring some intellectual rigor to the table. Or maybe just some rigor, or maybe rigor mortis. Whatever.

---

Quote:

---

I read the retraction in the paper posted, so what he did say was he was less than 1/4 Indian. All these real Indian groups seem to agree he is not an indian.....and have been petitioning CU to dump him for years. Mmmmmm.

---

Quote:

---

It is not unusual for Americans who have some Native American blood, but whose families live within the mainstream community and who know their heritage only from family tradition, to encounter difficulty proving their ethnicity to the satisfaction of administrators. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill

---

Quote:

---

How come you did'nt comment about the plagiarism Rue. Just curious mind you.

---