This just in from IndyBay, the ASUC has passed two separate bills sponsored by the Defend Affirmative Action Party.

Number One: Bill Opposing Anti-LGBTQ Discrimination and in Support of Removing Military Recruiters from UC Berkeley (.DOC link)

The ASUC calls on Chancellor Birgeneau, the UC-Berkeley administration, and the UC Regents to take measures to bar military recruiters from UC-Berkeley and throughout the UC system, taking into account the federal appeals court ruling in FAIR v. Rumsfeld. These measures should include public statements, legal action, and an immediate ban.

The ASUC shall deny the use of ASUC facilities and assets to military recruiters.

The ASUC condemns in the strongest possible terms discrimination and attacks against LGBTQ people of any kind.

The ASUC calls on the U.S. military to immediately revoke its discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

Number Two: Resolution to End the U.S. Colonial Occupation of Iraq and for Democracy in Iraq (.DOC link)

The ASUC condemns the ongoing U.S. military occupation of Iraq and calls for ending this occupation now.

The ASUC supports the right of the Iraqi people to determine their own national destiny. The ASUC calls for free, democratic elections in Iraq to form a new constitution and government without the interference of the United States or any other foreign power.

Furthermore, the ASUC supports the full and equal participation of women in all aspects of Iraqi political life and recognizes the right to national self-determination of the Kurdish people in Iraq.

The IndyBay commentary:

On March 30, 2005 the UC Berkeley ASUC Senate unanimously passed a resolution denying military recruiters use of facilities and assets because of their discriminatory policies.
—
In what may become a historic step in the anti-war effort, as well as the LGBT movement, the Associated Students of the University of California at UC Berkeley have unanimously passed a resolution denying military recruiters use of facilities and assets because of the military’s discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.
—
Much of the success of this resolution can be attributed to the November 2004 FAIR v. Rumsfeld ruling by the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. The ruling states that universities may bar military recruiters from their campuses without risking the loss of federal money, which had been a major deterrent in anti-recruitment efforts.

Before Ward Churchill came to Berkeley for the Academic Freedom Forum hosted by the UC Berkeley Ethnic Studies Department, he appeared at the Anarchist Book Fair in San Francisco on March 26, 2005. As usual, he always had much to say about America and its citizens.

Hat Tip: Zombie Time. Via Free Republic.

1. Ward Churchill Quote #1: “Americans are Nazis”. (Video)

“And I’ve got an answer for you and that answer is Eichmann! Eichmann! That is the mentality of Eichmann. Big Eichmann and little Eichmann. The good Germans that made that process possible are synonymous with the good Americans who voted for George Bush or thought that John Kerry was an alternative. [Audience applause.] And that explains the blind eye turned to a half-million Iraqi children. That’s an entire coming generation because for every dead there’s three more who are never gonna grow up other than in a twisted and physically deformed manner as a result of what’s been done to them in order to impose the United States’ will, and that’s genocide. When you talk about it being imposed on a country of barely 20 million people, a half-million children is the future. The future was denied in the interest of American domination of the rest of the planet in order to support a material way of life and a mentality which is absolutely on its face indefensible to anyone with a scintilla of moral integrity. ”

As Ward Churchill put it, 98.9% of Americans who voted in the last election were Nazis. If the anti-Bush voters who had voted for John Kerry thought they were safe from Ward Churchill, it’s about high time they think twice. Judging from this canard, Ward Churchill has shown his true colors: an anti-American academic that has little patience for this country and its citizens, and whose hatred for this county has no known bounds.

2. Ward Churchill Quote #2: You are all accomplices. (Audio only)

“I took this from Hannah Arendt, who was a noted scholar of the experience of the Holocaust, and who asked for the assignment, as a journalist, to go from New York to Tel Aviv to witness the trial. She wanted to confront the real Eichmann. In her mind he epitomized the evil to her, expected to confront a monstrosity, and what she found instead was a mouse. An absolutely nondescript little everyman. And the true magnitude of the horror began to penetrate. And what it was that penetrated was not the malevolence of Eichmann as the Nazi, as the overseer of the Holocaust, but his absolute banality, his everyman dimension. Not that he was a Nazi, but that in his everyman capacity he obviously and clearly signaled the fact that everyone bound up in mass status society was potentially him. Him. His very absence of unique and monstrous characteristics was that which was most horrifying about him. Going with the program renders you Eichmann. Going with the program voids your humanity. Going with the program makes you not just complicit but a participant in the process of genocide.”

According to Ward Churchill, we are all accomplices, willing Eichmanns who do The Leader’s bidding. And yet he is still claims that he is not anti-American. But once you call him that, he might start crying to our Ethnic Studies Department, so they could host another Ward Churchill Love Fest and save his ass from the anyone who even criticizes him.

Kevin D. Dayaratna explains what Ireland and Iraq have in common. Besides starting with the letter “I”:

On Sunday, rebel leaders in Northern Ireland staged rallies across Ireland in memory of a failed 1916 rebellion. These leaders, belonging to the Sinn Fein party, stand accused of complicity in helping the Irish Republican Army cover up the murder of a Catholic man in a pub in Northern Ireland two weeks ago. The conflict in Northern Ireland is one of the longest-standing and most hotly contested issues of the twentieth century. The roots behind this conflict, however, are no different from many other conflicts in today’s changing world. Understanding the situation in Northern Ireland may thus help us deal with other problems worldwide, particularly those in Iraq.

As Chancellor Birgeneau continues his crusade against Prop. 209, we’ll continue to keep a close watch on him. In his recent editorial in the LA Times, and now interview on Berkeley NewsCenter, he makes clear his position on the matter. But we have known since at least a month ago, what he was up to. And we also have an article in the latest Patriot about the going-ons.

Here’s some of excerpts from the interview:

Q. Are you suggesting that those who voted for 209 may not have known what they were getting into or what the consequences of its passage would be?

A. I think people voted for 209 idealistically and generally thought it would produce a fairer system. My conclusion, and the conclusion of many people around me, is that because it has resulted in a dramatic diminution in numbers of particular classes of California citizens, it has in fact created a system that is quite unfair.

Californians finally realized that race-based affirmative action was totally unfair. They changed the system to a fairer one. Get it? Got it? Good.

Q. Ward Connerly and others would say Proposition 209 is very clear: You can’t use race, ethnicity, or gender as a factor in making decisions, either about admissions or hiring. Why do you think this is not clear?

That is where we get into the intersection of a person’s race and the circumstances under which they grew up. A person may grow up in circumstances that are strongly disadvantageous, and I think we need to understand those better.

Here’s an essay by John McWhorter on the myth that Birgeneau is trying to perpetuate.

Q. Asian American students are well-represented in the Berkeley student body, and many of them face disadvantages as well.

A. All the people of California take great pride in the achievements of our Asian American students; we are very happy that the Asian community is so well represented here. Unfortunately, the African American and Chicano/Latino and Native American communities are grossly underrepresented. My concern is not only the low numbers of underrepresented students relative to the population of California now, but with what we’ll see if we project forward — especially with regard to the Chicano/Latino community — just 20 years. The students we are educating now, and who we hope will provide leadership in the future, are an even smaller percentage of what that population will be 20 years from now. My view is that as a public university we are not meeting our responsibilities in terms of the public good.

Couldn’t be any clearer: Less Asians.

Q. What will Berkeley be doing on your watch to meet what you believe to be our public responsibility?

A. First of all, because we are a university and we do research, it is our intention to create new research programs to help us to understand the state of California in a post-209 environment, to understand the importance of multiculturalism, to understand the importance of diversity and its impact on our society as a whole.

…

Wow, a new one already! Pick one up this week or check it out online (HTML|PDF), as always.

Some highlights: Five years, can you believe it? Hilarious photo in the Minuteman, you won’t want to miss it (yes, I’m talking to you). ASUC ENDORSEMENTS! INTERVIEW WITH BCR SENATE CANDIDATE! CalSERVE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE EXPOSED! And a great interview with Professor Daniel Klein on liberal bias in academia.

Enjoy the issue. Comments always appreciated.

Nonstop Chuchill coverage for you all, until something new comes up or we all get tired of it…

Berkeley’s Daily Cal has some student reaction in “Professor Not Swayed by Critics“:

Though the crowd was largely sympathetic to Churchill, a few UC Berkeley students objected to what they said was a very biased presentation of the issue.

“To me, academic freedom means these people shouldn’t say things that are factually incorrect,” said Kerry Eskenas, who attended the event. “Churchill is making an extremely broad generalization.”

First-year student Andrew Quinio said that Churchill seemed to be making the most of the media frenzy.

“They’re talking about academic freedom, but the panel’s completely one-sided,” he said. “Ward Churchill said he’s been violated, yet he hasn’t been fired and the media’s drooling all over him.”

And this ironic comment:

Hexter said the controversy that developed over Churchill is odd, particularly because most post-tenure reviews are conducted on very serious charges like sexual harassment.

“There’s a new culture of offense-taking,” he said. “It’s almost as if Churchill’s words were sacrilegious.”

Political correctness is hardly a new thing. Berkeley folks should know this more than most. There’s all sorts of things that aren’t said on this campus for fear of offending the quasi-religions of the left (feminism, Marxism, socialism, vegetarianism (not so much…), etc.)

The SF Chronicle has a fairly average article; nothing noteworthy to excerpt, but read it for completeness if you want.

Here’s a little bit from the Oakland Tribune and its sister papers:

[Chuchill] shot back Monday at his critics, saying he’s become a scapegoat for conservatives out to “sterilize” universities of ethnic, gay and women’s studies they find distasteful.

Distasteful? More like useless, worthless, and a total waste of money.

Protester Zachary RunningWolf of Oakland, a member of the Blackfoot tribe, said Churchill’s comments are damaging to American Indians, especially as tribes are under fire for attempts to expand Indian gaming casinos.

“He’s not helping out our community,” RunningWolf said.

Looking out for the good of the community ($$$)…

The New York Sun takes a “fair and balanced” look:

Mr. Wang, who organized the forum, dismissed the suggestion that Mr. Churchill might have gotten his job because he described himself as a Native American. “I don’t think there’s any research universities in America that do that kind of thing,” Mr. Wang said.

I want him to look me in the eye and say that again with a straight face. Note, Mr. Wang is head of the Ethnic Studies department…

Mr. Churchill said he never argued that those killed in the September 11 attacks deserved their fate, nor did he contend that the attacks were justified. “I maybe thought it but I did not say it,” he said.

I think Mr. Chuchill is an idiot, but I won’t say it.

Asked to assess Colorado’s professor’s argument, Mr. Hexter said, “I think the point he was trying to make is a valid one.” The dean quickly added that he does not agree with the way Mr. Churchill expressed his position nor with the assertion that America’s role in the world is comparable to that of the Nazis.

Hey, almost tricked me there!

And by way of lgf, we have zombie’s coverage of all of Chuchill’s Bay Area appearances. The Berkeley section will be up shortly. In the mean time, enjoy this picture of Chuchill’s adoring fans.

Yesterday’s “pity-party for Ward Churchill” hosted by the UC Berkeley Ethnic Studies Department was probably a nice start to the week. The forum, which was intended for a discussion about academic freedom, was actually a department sponsored bitch-fest about how the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy is targeting academia and how Ward Churchill, the “victim” of such wide scale attacks, is one of the first people on the list. Such a list will grow until every single academic who speaks out against the MAN is put into solitary confinement under the directions of the AmeriKKKan Fascist Regime!

Though I was only present during the last half of the forum, I was able to get the gist of the whole discussion: the White Man is bad (it’s good to be reminded sometimes), we live in a police-state, and that identity politics is the name of the game. The forum focused so much on the racial differences and antagonisms between whites and non-whites that it seems Ethnic Studies likes to feed off from the conflict between the two groups, and that continuing to emphasize the conflicts is the only way to stay relevant in political discussions.

The question-and-answer portion of the forum was interesting. Buoyed by the appearance of a largely sympathetic crowd, Ward Churchill felt at ease in receiving their praise and answering their questions. But one member of the audience stood out from the rest. Kerry Eskenas, a UC Berkeley student and member of the Berkeley College Republicans, told the panel that she disagreed with them and confronted Ward Churchill as to the outrageous comments he had made about the victims of the 9-11 attacks. I recently interviewed Ms. Eskenas concerning about the forum and Ward Churchill. (Posted below is the edited version of the interview. The interview was conducted over AIM. The original version was corrected for various errors.)

Carl Densing: What was Ward Churchill’s opening statement?

Kerry Eskenas: Well, it was really his only “statement,” each of the 4 [speakers] gave a speech, and he was first.

Carl Densing: I see. What did he say?

Kerry Eskenas: Well, I know you were taping the second half of the “forum” … I mentioned some of the things– such as how his job was to create “informed opinions.” And then, he goes off about this story of his, where he said that a few of my students came to him and told him about a bar in the financial district of San Francisco, right over the BART, and this bar glorified mass murder of Indians and even has the teeth of an enslaved Indian girl, and all these businesspeople go there after work, and to him that mentality was reminiscent of Eichmann.

It was like his “proof” of the 9/11 victims being Nazis is that financial districts must include businessmen who go to racist anti-Indian bars, because of this one instance of a few loser businessman.

He generalized to the entire WTC from one story he heard from a few of his students– this does not seem academic. It’s not professional, and the claim [he made] is obviously outrageous.

It’s like, wow, that’s really backed up with a lot of evidence, Ward. And even if such a [bar] does exist, it doesn’t speak for the 9/11 victims. He also talked about how this case against him is “the beginning” and it has “broad implications for all of us,” and how the politicians are going to go after all academics now.

After asking her question, Ward Churchill then attacks Ms. Eskenas for lacking a cogent argument in her questioning and for her inability to form a persuasive reasoning. With all the blather Ward Churchill directed at Ms. Eskenas, he did not answer her question, a diversion that I found interesting. (What’s also interesting was the direct attack on Ms. Eskenas. While the forum complained about the attacks directed at Ward Churchill, they tolerated what Ward Churchill did to her.)

Carl Densing: You asked him one question which really stood out: If you were on the plane that hit the WTC, would you have deserved that death? He did not answer your question, did he?

Kerry Eskenas: Yeah, I asked him that, because he was generalizing to all 9/11 victims. No, he didn’t answer [the question]. And then he brought up Ann Coulter because “they’re not going after HER, why me?” and it’s like, uh, she’s not an academic, you are. Also, 2 or 3 of the speakers [at the forum] claimed that only “a minority” opposes him, and the dean said that “Academic freedom should be absolute,” which was quite interesting of course.

In addition, Andrew [Quinio] brought up a funny point. [Ward Churchill’s] supporters are saying that his opponents are racists who hate Ward because he’s an Indian and his supporters are also saying that he got tenure because he’s an Indian. So basically those who awarded (and are now trying to retract) tenure to him, do they like him or dislike him because of his “Indian” status? They can’t have it both ways.

And while the panel preached about the need for racial diversity, it seemed that diversity of opinion was not on the offing.

Kerry Eskenas: I know; it’s incredible. I was saying to them, “you speak of democracy, you know, and yet I’m the first one here to say anything different from you people.” They don’t want ideological diversity, just skin color diversity. They want free speech but only for themselves, and they want to bash America and yet at the same time be protected by American rights that are only granted to them via our “evil” military.

All in all, the panel was not a waste of my time. I learned that their obsession with racial diversity is a cover for ideological conformity with the consequence of pitting one racial group against another. As for Ward Churchill, he did not fully address the issues concerning his record. Rather than answering the questions of Ms. Eskenas, he chose to divert his attention to other matters. So let me end this post with a question borrowed from Ms. Eskenas: If you, Ward Churchill, were on the plane that hit the WTC, wouuld you have deserved that fate?

Update:

A reader emailed me this comment:

Assuming it is even true, I wonder how Prof Churchill feels about bars that glorify the Soviet Union or Cuba or Che (a man who personally liked to pull the trigger)? Are people who frequent those places “little Eichmanns” who deserve to be slaughtered?
-Zachary Barbera

That’s a good question. I wonder what Dr. Churchill’s answer would be?

Also, some of you have asked about the “Anti-Native American” Bar in San Francisco that Ward Churchill talked about.

Isaac Clemens, one of the readers of the post, emailed me and told me that the bar’s name is “Eddie Rickenbackers” and it is owned by a former French Legionnaire. Mr. Clemens also gave me a link to the restaurant/bar: Anti-Indian Bar.

Also, thanks to all those who posted their comments. Most of the comments were enlightening and stuck to the issue at hand. There were only a few comments that were off topic.

This is the perfect contest for us Berkeley students! If one of us doesn’t win this, then we can all acknowledge that our campus has finally left the 60’s behind… Are our leftists only run-of-the-mill? Now’s the chance to find out:

Have you had to endure anti-American propaganda in place of a college lecture? Now you can turn your professor’s left-wing pontificating into cold, hard cash!

Just submit an essay, in 500 words or less, describing the professor you have had who most resembles Ward Churchill. This professor could have called capitalists “little Eichmanns,” like Churchill himself. He could have demonized perfidious, bloodthirsty Jews in Israel, like Juan Cole. He could have prayed for Americans to lose the war in Iraq, like Nicholas DeGenova or Robert Jensen. The professor could even have held an alternative religion exorcism to cleanse the campus of the demons of conservatism, like Oneida Meranto (a major fan of Che Guevara, who eliminated his enemies in another manner). Or she could have spent hours of class time prattling about off-topic political issues, then force students to say Saddam Hussein had no Weapons of Mass Destruction on a midterm, like UNC-Chapel Hill’s own Anthropology 10 professor Alison Greene.

Whoever the nominee, please indicate the subject of the course and explain why you have chosen this individual and why he or she deserves the coveted FrontPage Magazine Churchill Twin Award.

E-mail your submissions to: Ben@CSPC.org. The winner will receive $500. (It’s the capitalist way!) The winning essay and honorable mentions will also be posted on FrontPageMag.com. Get your essays in now! The deadline to win is April 23, 2005.

Feel free to share your experiences in the comments. This should be fun.

UPDATE:
Indybay has photos and audio of the event. Go take a look, especially if you didn’t get a chance to see this in person.
—
Res Ipsa Loquitur has a writeup of today’s event featuring Ward Churchill. As a bonus, extra outrageous statements from some of the other panelists. Check it out. Here’s a sample:

Churchill:

* Newt Gingrich is “ethnically-impaired”… apparently implying that white people don’t have ethnicities.
* Claimed that he’s being criticized because of his fight against “empire”, not his statement about “little Eichmanns”. Further elaborates that this must be the case because they’ve obviously “taken it to heart”. Because, of course, no one would take to heart his comparison of 9/11 victims to Nazi’s.

I also want to point out this article from the Rocky Mountain News covering Churchill’s appearance at another lefty landmark: “the 10th annual San Francisco Bay Area Anarchist Book Fair on Saturday at Golden Gate Park.”

The fair’s exhibits offered more than just books. There was clothing, including baby jumpers bearing the words “Future Queer” and T-shirts featuring a familiar fast food franchise logo and the words “Murder King.”

There were even games to play, including “Pin the Molotov Cocktail on the Cop Car.”

Here, there is nothing Churchill has ever written, said or thought, that would raise a pierced eyebrow.
—
“The people who were killed September 11th were not ‘little Eichmanns,’ ” a woman shouted, invoking the phrase Churchill included in his article “Some People Push Back” to describe many who worked in the World Trade Center.

“Shut up,” another countered.

Churchill smiled. “Well said,” he offered. “Succinct, to the point.”

Score one for thoughtful academics!

According to an article in the British Sunday Times, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is having problems with depression and is considering resigning his post as UN Secretary General:

KOFI ANNAN, the United Nations secretary-general, is said to be struggling with depression and considering his future. Colleagues have reported concerns about Annan ahead of an official report this week that will examine his son Kojo’s connection to the controversial Iraqi oil for food scheme … Depending on the findings of the report, by a team led by the former US Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, Annan may have to choose between the secretary-generalship and loyalty to his son … “Kofi Annan is going to find his position increasingly untenable,” said Nile Gardiner, an expert on the UN at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “There is a strong possibility he will resign voluntarily because of his declining credibility.”

Annan is serving his second five year term, which began in January 2002. Former US President Bill Clinton and current Chilean President Ricardo Lagos in the past have expressed interest in the position. However, it is generally considered to be Asia’s turn to fill the post, although no announcement has been made. I personally would prefer Clinton over any foreign leader for the sole reason that he at least has loyalty to the United States and acknowledges the strengths and weaknesses of the United Nations in resolving conflicts pertaining to American interests …

Here’s an interesting article from the AP detailing a new book and how it’s been adopted by Berkeley High:

The latest turn in the national conversation is toward a more intimate look into the lives of slaves, led by a novel that revisits Mark Twain’s classic and racially charged tale, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

My Jim is the first-person story of Sadie, the wife of Huck’s enslaved traveling companion. The aim of its author, Nancy Rawles, was to reimagine Jim as more than a runaway drifting down the Mississippi River with a delinquent youth, more than the gullible victim and moral father figure to Huck that Twain portrays. Rawles wanted to consider the familiar tale from the perspective of the family Jim left behind - and to consider the shattered families of many slaves.

During high school, I always made it a point not to read “classic” works of literature. Thank you SparkNotes. But I generally think this type of project is pretty cool: same story, different perspective. If I were into this stuff, I would probably check it out…

Rawles, a Seattle-based writer and amateur historian, spent months researching the personal histories of slaves, traveling to Twain’s home town of Hannibal, Missouri, and reading oral histories, before writing My Jim. The book was published in January and is already in its third printing, with about 20,000 copies in print. While writing, she hoped her book would be taught alongside Huck Finn in classrooms.

An educator at Berkeley High School quickly fulfilled that wish. Veteran literature teacher Alan Miller heard about My Jim and was delighted to assign it to his 11th-grade students - so he could “teach ‘Huck’ right,” he said. He also persuaded two colleagues on campus to include it in their classes. Berkeley High is the only school in the United States in which students study “Huck Finn” and “My Jim” together, according to Rawles’ publisher, Random House, Inc. Education experts also say that Berkeley is believed to be the only high school in the nation with an African American studies department.

“‘Huck’ is a book that needs a great deal of context and sensitivity to Jim’s motive and Jim’s depiction,” Miller said. “It’s very easy to focus on Huck, but if you focus on Huck you’re missing a key component of the book.”

So for a hundred years, anyone who has been teaching it, hasn’t been teaching it right? That’s the only minor issue that I have. Oh, besides the usual “why have an African American studies department in high school” problem. But we’ve gone over that already.

Since the 1950s, at the beginning of the civil rights movement, many parents and community leaders - particularly blacks - have tried to evict the book from library shelves and seek court orders barring its use in classrooms, including in Berkeley several years ago, Miller said. Courts have consistently resisted, citing free speech issues. As recently as last year in Renton, Washington, a Seattle suburb, a black family tried unsuccessfully to have the book removed from school reading lists.

In recent years, many scholars, including Rawles, have argued that Huck Finn is an anti-slavery book that was as progressive as could be expected, given the blatant racial hostility rampant in the United States when Twain wrote it.

Unfortunately, some people refuse to look beyond the superficial. And we still see this in similar cases, even when we know better.

Black Issues’ Dodson agreed. “I didn’t think Huck Finn was a bad book, but I do see it (My Jim) basically as filling out the story, making him more human,” she said.

Brian Holbert, a senior at Berkeley High, and other black students said they were not bothered by Twain’s derogatory language - Holbert’s classmates often use such words as “nigger” in casual conversation and hear the term repeatedly in popular music. But he disliked “Huck Finn” when he read it last year because it didn’t address slavery more directly. “I don’t think there’s really a good example of literature we can use that really teaches about slavery,” he said. Now, though, My Jim has tweaked his interest and he plans to read the book.

David Singer-Vine, a student in Miller’s class, criticized My Jim for not allowing Huck Finn to stand on its own. “I don’t know that (Twain) would want to distort his work this way,” Singer-Vine said. “She (Rawles) didn’t know anything about what he wanted.”

Well, I don’t know either. But I do know that it’s harder to find study guides for books this new. Good luck and good reading guys.

Berkeley High sinks to a new low, in this report by the Berkeley Daily Planet:

The military recruitment budget is $3 billion annually; 90 percent of the people killed in war are civilian noncombatants; 91 percent of Berkeley High students believe the war in Iraq is wrong and illegal; 65 percent of veterans never get their education benefits; 33 percent of homeless men are veterans….

It was more than these factoids splashed across the screen in the school auditorium and the anti-war rap pulsating in the background that kept the Berkeley High students riveted to their seats Wednesday. It was the real life lesson in war, taught by some who touched battle up close and by others who escaped it that kept the teens’ attention.

The idea of the anti-war teach-in—four different presentations given to four groups of about 300 students—was hatched by students studying social justice and social action in CAS, Berkeley High’s Communication Arts and Sciences school. The project was guided by CAS teacher Joanna Sapir.

If 90% of the school is already against the war, then talk about preaching to the choir. Can I believe my eyes? Students studying “social justice and social action” in high school!? I guess this is what passes for an education these days. These are probably the same people who also complain about the unfairness of standardized tests and college admissions. Whatever happened to learning about reading, math, and science?

The possibility of a draft was on the minds of students and panelists. Speaking from the audience, one student asked if a draft would be more equitable than recruiting low-income youth as is done today. (A bill with this intent, authored by Rep. Charles Rangel, D-NY, was defeated in the House in October.)

Yet one more example why if the draft ever returns, it will be the doing of the left.

Oakland City Council candidate Aimee Allison, who was honorably discharged as a conscientious objector from the Army during the First Gulf War, counseled students who think they might have moral or religious grounds for opposing the war. She told them to begin a file now to prove their beliefs in case of a draft. For example, they might include papers they’ve written for school, a letter to the editor, proof of membership in a social activist club, pictures of them at an anti-war march.

Or as they might say, building up your leftist street cred. I like her fear-mongering in the companion article:

The issue of a draft is becoming critical, she told the students. “Many people believe that the question isn’t if there’s going to be a draft, but how it’s going to be implemented,…You have rights; there are those of us who will support you whatever you decide to do.” And the question isn’t just for men. Addressing the young women in the audience, she said: “If you think the draft will not target you, I think that you are mistaken.”

At least there looks like there might be at least one person with sense left at that school:

As panelists took audience questions, the students who spoke seemed generally against war and against serving in the military. However, student Mateo Guttierez challenged the panel, asking, “Do you think it’s immoral or unpatriotic to use tax-payer time during school to give information on draft resistance?”

Ed Hasbrouck answered the question, saying that he believed the country was founded on principals of resistance. “Schools give people a chance to grow and learn,” he said. “It would be an immoral use of schools to educate people to kill.”

I don’t think public schools should be doing anything but teaching actual subjects. But the government does provide funding, so they should be able to recruit however the hell they want to. If you don’t like that, then perhaps you would agree with me that schools need to be privatized. But that’s another thing altogether. Mr. Hasbrouck commented on my previous post about this event. I really doubt that you’d ever learn how to “kill” on a high school campus. Except maybe in the sex-ed class…

I’m not fond of political correctness from any side so, just to show that I’m somewhat fair, here’s an article to accompany this one that I posted earlier:

They say one was non-American. And the other was un-American.

So a plan to name new reading rooms at El Segundo’s public library in honor of authors Agatha Christie and Jack London has been ordered shelved by the City Council.

“I’m a great fan of Agatha Christie. Murder mystery novels is what I read. But she’s a British citizen,” said Councilman John Gaines.

“And I’m also a great fan of Jack London. I read all his books as a kid. But quite frankly, he was a world-renowned communist.”

He very well may have been. But apparently he wrote some pretty good books (not that I would know). And you guys are naming a reading room to honor great writers, so why not at least consider it?

“You can’t do anything these days without offending someone. You really have to do your political due-diligence. Are there any unsullied American authors?” he asked. “It would be hard off the top of my head to name a writer who would be everybody’s notion of all-American. Writers by their very definition are troublemakers.”

This case is a little different from the Thomas Jefferson Elementary School one. There, they’re trying to change an already existing name. Here, they’re trying to come up a name for the first time. But we see manifestations of political correctness in both places. You’re never going to make everyone happy. They should be teaching that lesson in the schools.

Or they could just call it the J. K. Rowling Reading Room. Because everyone loves Harry Potter.

The Capitalist Worker over at Res Ipsa Loquitur has the scoop:

“Academic Freedom in Peril: Prof. Ward Churchill and His Right of Free Speech”
A Forum on Academic Freedom in Troubled Times

Speakers:

Prof. Ward Churchill, Native American & Ethnic Studies
University of Colorado, Boulder
—
Date: Monday, March 28, 2005
Time: 12- 2 p.m.
Place: Pauley Ballroom, MLK

Come watch the embattled professor give his side of the story. Come get the truth (hah!), you little Eichmanns…