College doctors photograph of gun-toting Ward Churchill

Desertdog · Oct 29, 2005

College doctors photograph of gun-toting Ward Churchill
WND inquiry prompts school to yank image which completely 'erased' rifle

By Joe Kovacs
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47120

Doctored photo of Ward Churchill shows him without gun and without his right arm

On the heels of USA Today's doctored photograph of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this week, a WorldNetDaily inquiry into an altered photo of a gun-toting Ward Churchill has prompted a Seattle-area college to remove the image from its website.

Shoreline Community College had electronically erased an AK-47 rifle from the image of the controversial University of Colorado professor, who is slated to speak at the Washington campus Nov. 8.

Original photo of Ward Churchill

But shortly after WND interviewed school officials about the doctored photo, Churchill's image was completely removed from the page promoting his appearance.

"I think we're going to take the photograph off," Scott Saunders, director of student programs at Shoreline, told WorldNetDaily when asked about the display of Churchill, newly disarmed in both weapon and right limb.

Churchill has come under fire this year for comparing the victims of the 9-11 World Trade Center terror attacks to Nazis while praising the suicide hijackers for their "gallant sacrifices."

He also suggested anti-war activists should support those who kill their officers, and has said he wants the "U.S. off the planet. Out of existence altogether."

Judy Yu, SCC's director of communications, explained the college received only two publicity photographs of Churchill from the public-relations agency handling the professor.

"One had a cigarette in his mouth, and the other had a gun," she said. "Obviously, we cannot support guns, so it was taken out," noting the college also did not wish to endorse smoking by using the other picture. "I would have looked harder for another photograph."

"It's not a news story bound by journalistic integrity," Yu continued, noting the doctored photo was simply part of a promotion to get people to attend the speech.

dasmi · Oct 29, 2005

"One had a cigarette in his mouth, and the other had a gun," she said. "Obviously, we cannot support guns, so it was taken out," noting the college also did not wish to endorse smoking by using the other picture. "I would have looked harder for another photograph."

Oh, obviously.
But you can support a left wing nut toting an AK. Bloody hypocrites.

TexasRifleman · Oct 29, 2005

It's academia. The good thing is that no one listens or cares what they do more then 2 minutes after getting the diploma.

Academia thinks itself relevant, the rest of the world knows it is not.

beerslurpy · Oct 29, 2005

Justin said:
The AK47 is the perfect rifle for Walter Mitty.

It's a perfect rifle for a lot of other things, which is why it figures prominently in the fantasy lives of the Walter Mitty's of the world. Surely the past 50 years havent been a figment of my imagination?

Desertdog · Oct 29, 2005

Thanks dasmi, I haven't any idea on how to post the pictures.

Kurush · Oct 29, 2005

I can't believe that guy is still a professor. Never mind the Eichmann comments, the fact that he's a serial plagiarist and completely fabricated a story that the US army deliberately infected indians with smallpox should be more than enough.

CentralTexas · Oct 29, 2005

But

what's the USA story with Condi?
CT

geekWithA.45 · Oct 29, 2005

What a pathetic Che' wannabe.

dpesec · Oct 29, 2005

TexasSIGman said:
It's academia. The good thing is that no one listens or cares what they do more then 2 minutes after getting the diploma.

Academia thinks itself relevant, the rest of the world knows it is not.

Texas, perhaps but these people often shape the terms of the debate. How? by filling kid's mids with liberal crap.

Ezekiel · Oct 29, 2005

fabricated a story that the US army deliberately infected indians with smallpox should be more than enough.

So the argument is that this never occurred? Or, not in the instance specified by Churchill?

Don't get me wrong: he's a nutjob. I just hate it when nutjobs muddy the waters of accepted truths for the own self gain. It belittles that which is known. (Although I readily admit bias and open myself to examination. My respect for this site demands such.)

captain obvious · Oct 29, 2005

Why was he carrying an AK (not that I have a problem with carrying such rifles)?

c_yeager · Oct 29, 2005

The whole school isnt *that* messed up. I was briefly a student there and carried a CCW in accordance with school policy. They specifically prohibit only illegally carried firearms, and they have at least one criminal justice class that actually involves firearms training.

One does have to wonde, how is it that a photograph of a man with either a gun or a cigarette is too controversial but a person espousing a desire to wipe the U.S. off the map is A-OK?

Standing Wolf · Oct 29, 2005

What some people won't do to get their pictures on the internet!

Kurush · Oct 29, 2005

Ezekiel said:
So the argument is that this never occurred? Or, not in the instance specified by Churchill?

Don't get me wrong: he's a nutjob. I just hate it when nutjobs muddy the waters of accepted truths for the own self gain. It belittles that which is known. (Although I readily admit bias and open myself to examination. My respect for this site demands such.)

To my knowledge the US Army never did such. Here's a writeup of the issue:
http://hal.lamar.edu/~browntf/Churchill1.htm

3rdpig · Oct 29, 2005

Personally I'm amazed at the stupidity of the adminstrators and the students. He wants to wipe the USA off the face of the earth, he thinks terrorists are brave freedom fighters. Ok, everyone's got a right to their opinion, no matter how insane. But how in God's name do the students and administrators think he, and those like him, will achieve that goal? With guns! Yet the idiots erase the gun from his picture. They accept the thought of killing millions, but not the means. How stupid can you get? How do they expect to defeat those of us who not only accept guns, but own them and train with them? Idiots. God I'm glad I never had kids. I'd commit suicide (or murder) if I had kids that dense.

Like Buford T. Justice said, "I can't believe you sprung from my loins!".

Desertdog · Oct 30, 2005

How stupid can you get? How do they expect to defeat those of us who not only accept guns, but own them and train with them? Idiots.

Stupid? Have you seen all the gun laws out there. That is how they expect to defeat us, disarm us first then only they have the guns.
Also, you must remember the 1960s Communist Fifth Colomnist(antiwar activist) are todays Democrat party and college proffessors.

Fletchette · Oct 30, 2005

"One had a cigarette in his mouth, and the other had a gun," she said. "Obviously, we cannot support guns, so it was taken out," noting the college also did not wish to endorse smoking by using the other picture. "I would have looked harder for another photograph."

Here is the problem - the belief that "we cannot support guns". Why? Do they support smoking? Nope. Does having a photograph mean that you "support" what is going on in the phtotgraph?

The libs are really, well, nuts.

c_yeager · Oct 30, 2005

Fletchette said:
Here is the problem - the belief that "we cannot support guns". Why? Do they support smoking? Nope. Does having a photograph mean that you "support" what is going on in the phtotgraph?

The libs are really, well, nuts.

The part that is troubleing is this:

By her reasoning the college endorses everything that they have there. And that means that she is of the opinion that the college endorses Churchills message, and she is OK with that.

antsi · Oct 30, 2005

Ms. Yu,

You were quoted: "One had a cigarette in his mouth, and the other had a gun," she said. "Obviously, we cannot support guns, so it was taken out."

OK, so let me get this straight. You can support someone who advocates the destruction of the United States and who applauds the 9-11 terrorists. But a firearm – an inanimate object – is so objectionable that you have to censor it out of the picture.

I think you’ve got your priorities twisted.

Personally, I’d have preferred a picture of the AK-47 with Ward Churchill edited out.

Regards,

Antsi

Tropical Z · Oct 30, 2005

The benefits of looney leftists in our colleges.Liberals are such hypocrites!:banghead:

DRZinn · Oct 30, 2005

Personally, I’d have preferred a picture of the AK-47 with Ward Churchill edited out.

Bravo!

El Tejon · Oct 30, 2005

Anyone else thinking of Winston Smith and his job at the Ministry of Truth in 1984?

The Left has long been attempting to edit the past to conform with their politics. Why is it any surprise that U.S. universities, one of the last bastions of socialism, does it?

DeseoUnTaco · Oct 30, 2005

This guy is so not qualified to be a taxpayer-supported professor or even a taxpayer-supported dog catcher. He has never earned a PhD. How did he get tenure? There is something seriously wrong with a system that gives people a free pass just on the basis of being radical left-wing idiots. I have seen this happen at other universities too.

His stupid comments about 9/11 are nothing compared to the other problems he has, such as lying about his Indian ancestry and being a professor without a PhD and basically the idea that the taxpayers should support an idiot who rants about wanting to overthrow the government.

Read all about him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill

College doctors photograph of gun-toting Ward Churchill

Member

Member

Moderator Emeritus

member

Member

Member

Member

Moderator Emeritus

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member in memoriam

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads