SHOULD TEACHERS BE ALLOWED TO SAY WHAT THEY WANT IN THE CLASSROOM? PART THREE

Please read this piece on Ward Churchill. The report to which it refers is the Report of the Investigative Committee of the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct at the University of Colorado at Boulder concerning Allegations of Academic Misconduct against Professor Ward Churchill. I'd like to know if what we're looking at here is a witch-hunt being commissioned through backroom deals.

Here's a thought: if, as Professor Mayer says, the standards for "academic misconduct" are so vague that practically anyone in the academic business can be found guilty, maybe it's time we investigated the opera of some of the committee members, e.g.: Marianne Wesson, Robert N. Clinton, or maybe Jose E. Limon, for anything that could be inflated into "misconduct" in the same way in which it has been done to Professor Churchill.

Now, in saying this, I'm not particularly interested in crucifying anyone -- but I do want to verify the technique that Professor Mayer suggests is being used against Professor Churchill. And what better subjects for this verification than the people who are using the technique?

Footnote: Ward Churchill's version of the story can be read on Counterpunch.