Friday, March 16, 2007

The Churchill Series – Mar. 16, 2007

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Did Churchill stutter? The Stuttering Foundation of America says he did.

But we read in a New York Sun article concerning false claims various interest groups have made about famous people:

The conclusions, made many years after the deaths of these famous [people] grab the public's attention, inspire today's patients and bring in money for research and advocacy. There's only one problem: Often, the diagnoses are wrong.

"It's a lie. It's like saying to somebody, `Churchill overcame this; therefore you can.' Maybe you can, but it shouldn't be a lie, or a misrepresentation," said Dr. John Mather, a Washington physician who has debunked several medical myths about Churchill. "It's a matter of forthrightness and accuracy." […]

The Stuttering Foundation of America ran a full-page ad in a May issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, with a photo of Churchill and this headline: "The voice of freedom never faltered, even though it stuttered."

The foundation cites five sources, all dated before 1975, making references varying from a "slight stutter" to a "stutter that took him years to overcome."

Mather and others say Churchill never had a stutter; they point to tapes of his speeches and a medical evaluation that show Churchill simply had a lisp on his s's and p's.[…]
You can read The Sun article here.

Enjoy the weekend, including St. Patrick’s Day.

BTW – Does any of you know whether St. Patrick stuttered or was learning disabled?

KC has facsimile of "Wanted" poster

Go over to Durham-in-Wonderland to see a facsimile of the "Wanted" poster some people say doesn't exist.

Thank you, KC.

Duke's silence on “Vigilante” and “Wanted” posters

“The facts kept changing. Every day we learned new things that no one knew the day before. Every day we were being urged to speak with certainty about facts that were full of great uncertainty at that point. Our policy all along was to act on the basis of the things we knew for sure and to withhold action and decision on the things we didn’t know for sure.”

Duke University President Richard H. Brodhead speaking to the late CBS newsman Ed Bradley during a 60 Minutes interview aired Oct. 15, 2006.

Of course, facts don’t keep changing.

A few facts Brodhead knew by March 29:

The players had cooperated with police. But when Nifong, the N&O and others attacked the players with false charges of cover-up and stonewalling, Brodhead said nothing to correct the false charges.

The “Wanted” and “Vigilante” posters were false, inflammatory and endangered the players and other students who might be the unintended victims of acts by unstable people and hate groups targeting the players

But Duke's never said that during the past year.

So for example, when faculty-members, students and others swarmed about the West Campus lawn in front of Brodhead's office and on the Chapel steps the night of March 29 waving “Wanted” and “Vigilante” posters and targeting the players with threats, Brodhead and apparently no other Duke administrator said said anything condemning those targeting the players and endangering their safety and that of others.

Brodhead and other members of “the Brodhead team” had an duty to speak out.

That wouldn’t have been hard to do. Here’s part of a letter (subscription reg.)that appeared in the Apr. 2 Raleigh N&O condemning specifically those who circulated “Vigilante” posters and targeted the players on Mar. 29:

As one of the organizers of the March 29 Take Back the Night (TBTN) march and speak-out at Duke University, I want to clarify that we did not plan, nor do we endorse, the distribution of names and pictures of members of the Duke men's lacrosse team.

The distribution of the pictures, the targeting of the lacrosse team, and the violence implicit in the defacement of the pictures are nothing less than violations of the space that TBTN exists to create.

The event is neither a protest of the kind we've witnessed recently, a forum for accusation nor a place to target and defame. That some attendees tried to make it so is saddening and not at all in the spirit of the event.
Thank you Geoffrey Lorenz for writing your letter.

I hope Duke trustees are asking themselves why President Brodhead or one of his senior “team members” didn’t write a similar letter.

Sowell on “Global Warming Swindle”

Scholar and columnist Thomas Sowell writes:

Britain's Channel 4 has produced a devastating documentary titled "The Great Global Warming Swindle." It has apparently not been broadcast by any of the networks in the United States. But, fortunately, it is available on the Internet.

Distinguished scientists specializing in climate and climate-related fields talk in plain English and present readily understood graphs showing what a crock the current global warming hysteria is.

These include scientists from MIT and top-tier universities in a number of countries. Some of these are scientists whose names were paraded on some of the global warming publications that are being promoted in the media -- but who state plainly that they neither wrote those publications nor approved them.

One scientist threatened to sue unless his name was removed.

While the public has been led to believe that "all" the leading scientists buy the global warming hysteria and the political agenda that goes with it, in fact the official reports from the United Nations or the National Academy of Sciences are written by bureaucrats -- and then garnished with the names of leading scientists who were "consulted," but whose contrary conclusions have been ignored.
We expect the U.N. to mislead us. But the National Academy of Sciences? How did that happen?

I plan to write Sowell and ask him to devote a column to explaining what many people, including scientists, are saying about the NAM: It’s been politized just like that ABA.

Sowell continues:
There is no question that the globe is warming but it has warmed and cooled before, and is not as warm today as it was some centuries ago, before there were any automobiles and before there was as much burning of fossil fuels as today.

None of the dire things predicted today happened then.

The British documentary goes into some of the many factors that have caused the earth to warm and cool for centuries, including changes in activities on the sun, 93 million miles away and wholly beyond the jurisdiction of the Kyoto treaty.

According to these climate scientists, human activities have very little effect on the climate, compared to many other factors, from volcanoes to clouds.

These climate scientists likewise debunk the mathematical models that have been used to hype global warming hysteria, even though hard evidence stretching back over centuries contradicts these models.

What is even scarier than seeing how easily the public, the media, and the politicians have been manipulated and stampeded, is discovering how much effort has been put into silencing scientists who dare to say that the emperor has no clothes.

Academics who jump on the global warming bandwagon are far more likely to get big research grants than those who express doubts -- and research is the lifeblood of an academic career at leading universities […].
I hope you read all of Sowell’s column which ends:
No one denies that temperatures are about a degree warmer than they were a century ago.

What the climate scientists in the British documentary deny is that you can mindlessly extrapolate that, or that we are headed for a climate catastrophe if we don't take drastic steps that could cause an economic catastrophe.

"Global warming" is just the latest in a long line of hysterical crusades to which we seem to be increasingly susceptible.
Question: If it comes to the point where people can’t “mindlessly extrapolate” about global warming, what will Al Gore do?

Thursday, March 15, 2007

CS Duke lax “Wanted” poster update

If you’re not familiar with the Durham CrimeStoppers’ Duke lacrosse “Wanted” poster’s production and distribution as well as a Durham attorney's request, on behalf of an unindicted lacrosse player, for an official investigation and public report by Durham Police and City regarding it as well as an official public apology for the poster which the attorney says libeled the lacrosse team, please see here, here and here.

In this post I'll respond to some reader comments on the threads of "Letter to DU Police Director" and "Talking w. Regulars/Readers - 3-15-07." I'll respond to some other comments in the next few days.

Readers’ comments (or parts thereof) are in italics with my comments following in plain print.

I see in the comments here …that at least one [CS] board member is allegedly taking the position that it is not Addison's fault if a third party made them available to others.

I'm lost trying to figure out what that board member is thinking Addison's words were distributed for in the first place.

Addison's notification to others of a crime were not distributed to be kept a secret among some Crimestopper's elite.

You’re right. The CS distribution list which CS coordinator DPL Cpl. David Addison used included DPD substations, many media outlets including newspapers and tv stations, etc.

Was [DUPD director] Robert Dean the Director at the time of the big party last year?

Dear served on the DUPD force before retiring with the rank of Major. Shortly thereafter, Dean was called back to serve as interim director while Duke searched for a permanent director.

On Feb. 9, 2006, a month and five days before Crystal Mangum made her March 14 false witness, Duke announced Dean’s selection as its new police director.

Thanks for informing the trustees by sending a copy to[board of trustee chairman Robert] Steele. I often wonder what understanding [the trustees] have of the events on campus this past year.

I wonder about that, too. Except for a few statements by Steel supportive of Brodhead and the “throw them under the bus” strategy, I can’t recall any other trustee statements.

When the racists shouted death threats at Reade Seligmann on May 18 not a single Duke trustee spoke out to condemn the racists or say any words of support to Seligmann and his family.

(Folks, The following is a comment I answer inter-paragraph. So from here until you see a star line (******), I'm responding to just one comment. - JinC )

I have spoken with a member of the Durham Crimestoppers board.

It was his position that he had seen copies of Cpl. Addison's elistserve postings, and the subsequent revisions (which, in his words, were so subtle as to be practically insignificant) but that he had never seen a "poster" or "flyer".

The poster’s were out there. In a number of posts I’ve described one I have that’s on DPD letterhead. I can’t reproduce it because of my tech limits but the board member should be able to get a copy.

He also said that he did not believe that Cpl. Addison had been responsible for the distribution of any "posters". And that if some third party had copied Addison's initial words, and printed and distributed these words in a poster or flyer, then it was inappropriate to hold Cpl. Addison responsible.

Will a judge or jury will buy that?

I cover the "CS didn't produce the 'Wanted' poster" claim in this post: "Not my poster."

Keep checking in here. In a few days, I may have more on Addison’s CS “Wanted” poster work.

It was the position of this board member that Addison had "made a mistake", but then had quickly corrected the mistake, so "no harm - no foul".

What “mistake” did this CS board member say Addison made?

As for “quickly” correcting “the mistake” ---

Addison distributed the text of the CS “Wanted” poster on March 28. It wasn’t until the morning of April 10 that DPD Maj. Lee Russ began directing Addison to make changes in the “Wanted” poster text.

“Quickly” is a relative term. But we can all agree on this: from March 28 to April 10 is a total of 14 days or, put another way, two weeks.

That’s “quickly?”

I wonder what a fair judge or jury would call it.

Something else: April 10 is the day the defense attorneys were notified the first round of DNA testing by the state lab came back negative. They scheduled a news conference for later that day to announce the results.

Meanwhile, Nifong, Gottlieb and Himan were riding down the interstate to Burlington to meet with that most accommodating of DNA experts, Brian Meehan.

It was also the position of this Durham Crimestoppers board member that they did not give unqualified authority to anyone, including Cpl. Addison, to speak in their name.

I can’t speak to what Durham CrimeStoppers did or did not authorize Addison to do. I’m just reporting what I’m told and asking reasonable follow-up questions.

But any Durham CS board member must surely know CS needs to speak publicly, promptly and unequivocally to the question of whether Addison had CS authorization to produce and distribute the text of the CS “Wanted” poster.

When I pointed out the statement attributed to Major Russ of the Durham PD, and asked whether Durham CrimeStoppers might believe it was appropriate to put out a clarifying statement, the board member said that he saw no reason for CrimeStoppers to explain itself or to clarify anything.

I hope there was a misunderstanding regarding what the board member said. Are we really going to see Durham CS with Dean chairing the CS board and dean of students Wasiolek serving on th board announce there's "no reason for CrimeStoppers to explain itself or to clarify anything?'

Wouldn't that be too much for people who care about justice, student safety and Duke to stomach?


CrimeStoppers is a great organization.

Great organizations welcome sunshine. Even when bringing things to light is uncomfortable, the outcome can be a better-defined sense of mission, and a clearer idea of the procedures that will bring the goals closer.

The challenge for the CS Board members is to keep in mind that they run a great organization, and what that implies about what they should now do.

Well said.

It’s hard to believe Durham CS would be anything but open and honest about the “Wanted” poster, especially with Duke’s Police Director heading its board and Duke’s Dean of Students, Sue Wasiolek, serving on the board.

I’ll very soon respond to other CS “Wanted” poster questions/comments.

And I’m not forgetting the “Vigilante” poster which a check today of my archives reveals I’ve posted on 47 times.

But right Ithink I should keep my focus on the “Wanted” poster and Duke’s extensive involvement with Cpl. Addison and CS as well as its failure to condemn the libel and endangerment Addison pumped out to the Duke campus and the Durham community in CS’s name.

Let's all hope before I again post on the "Vigilante" poster, President Brodhead will have finally condemned the hate-mongers who spread the "Wanted" and "Vigilante" posters about Duke campus the night of March 29, literally under his office window.

No Churchill Series post - Mar. 15, 2007


I'm sorry to miss today but my blogging time's been limited.

Look for a post tomorrow.



Talking w. Regulars & Readers - 3-15-07

(A post in the old "web log" tradition: notes "at the end of the day" for those familiar with what's being talked about. Don't look for links in this post.)

JinC threads are always worth reading. In the last 10 days, they've been especially worth reading.

I'll respond here in PDQ manner to some recent comments . Tomorrow, I'll respond with more detail to other comments.

Regarding Chronicle columnist Shadee's reference to "sexual agency,"a reader, while no doubt smiling, asked just what Shadee meant by "sexual agency."

That's an easy question.

A "sexual agency" is where you go to get your "sexual license" renewed.

I'm surprised Shadee, a Duke Senior and Women's Studies and Cultural Anthropology double major, didn't mention that.

Speaking of majors ---

We're you surprised to learn that Durham Police Major Lee Russ has been leading ol'JinC "around the barn" since last May on the matter of who the Durham CS board members were?

I don't think you were; and neither was I.

But I sure was surprised to learn Duke University Police Director Robert Dean was chair of the board of Durham CrimeStoppers when CS's coordinator, Durham Police Cpl. David Addison, produced and distributed the text of the CS Duke lacrosse "Wanted" poster.

The same goes for learning Duke’s Dean of Students, Sue Wasiolek, was also a CS board member at the time.

Would you have believed even two weeks ago that Duke's Dean of Students and its Police Director were CS board members when the "Wanted" poster was produced? Or that they apparently said nothing last March and April when the poster endangered and libeled Duke students?

I'll stay on this matter as my post today, which includes a letter to Director Dean, demonstrates.

A very thoughtful reader wonders why I said 46 rather than 47 Duke students were harmed and very likly have cause to bring suit.

The 47th student is the African American member of the '06 Duke lax team.

That student may very well have cause for action. But because the 46 were ID'ed as "white," and because part of bringing a libel claim is you prove you were ID'ed, I didn't mention the AA student in what was already a long, complex post.

If the AA student brings suit, he may, depending on the basis of the suit, have to make a somewhat different case than the other 46 students.

No doubt all 47 have been gravely harmed by many individuals and organizations. I wish all 47 success in actions they bring which, besides giving them some measure of restorative justice, will benefit all of us who need to know "who did what" so we can make sure "who" never again does "what."

A reader suggested I include in my letter to Director Dean a query concerning the “Vigilante” poster.

I didn’t mention the “Vigilante” poster because I wanted to keep the focus on the “Wanted” poster.

But I’ve posted on the “Vigilante” poster from the beginning and will again very soon.

Instapundit linked to JinC? Do you know why that happened?

Because you and others have refused to rollover and accept a frame-up and its enablement. On comment threads, forums and other places literally thousands of people have been making their voices heard.

Together we’re making a difference.

Yes, the work is hard and slow.

That’s why we need to keep on keeping on.

Hat tips to all the justice seekers.

More soon.


Regulars/Readers post will be late

but I'll have it up in about 6 hours.

Sorry for the delay.



Wednesday, March 14, 2007

The Churchill Series – Mar. 14, 2007

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Historian Richard Langworth edits the Churchill Centre’s journal Their Finest Hour. Today at the Centre’s website he posted a statement that began:

A lifelong supporter of Zionism and the Jewish people, Winston Churchill is now being accused of anti-semitism on the strength of an alleged article of his, making the rounds of the internet.
Informed of a 1937 article draft in the Churchill Archives, accusers say it proves Churchill's lifelong sympathy for the Jews was hypocrisy—that Churchill was, ipso facto, a closet anti-semite. […]
But Churchill wasn’t an anti-semite, closet or otherwise. Langworth leaves no doubt about that. You can read his statement here.

By the time you finish reading Langworth’s statement, I think you'll agree the Cambridge University historian who’s just suggested Churchill was an anti-semite, Dr. Richard Toye, is himself a “magician” trying to make something out of nothing.

Letter to DU Police Director

Readers Note: The posts, Addison Series #5 - "Major Duke Involvement" and "KC advances Addison, Duke, CS story" provide background for the following letter I'm sending to DU Police Director Robert Dean.


March 15, 2007

Robert H. Dean, Director
Duke University Police Department
Durham, North Carolina

Dear Director Dean:

I’m a Duke alum who blogs as John in Carolina.

I’ve posted frequently concerning the CrimeStoppers Duke lacrosse “Wanted” poster and the so-far anonymous “Vigilante” poster.

As you know, in late March and April 2006, both posters were widely circulated on campus and elsewhere in the community. False and inflammatory, they defamed and endangered the players most directly, but also put at greater risk others who might be the unintentional victims of unstable individuals and hate groups targeting the lacrosse players.

Since last May I’ve researched and published extensively concerning the production and distribution of both posters. (I link below to five posts concerning the posters. I’ll provide others if you wish.)

As Duke University Police Director you’ve had involvement with both posters. In this letter I want to ask you only about the CS “Wanted” poster and matters related to it.

I recently learned that, in addition to your duties as DU Police Director, you also serve as Chairman of the Board of Durham CrimeStoppers; and you held that position last March and April.

I’d like to ask you five questions, your answers to which I’ll share in full with my readers, who include many Duke alums, family and friends of the Duke students defamed and endangered by the posters, and Durham residents.

1) Were you aware on or before March 28 of the contents of the CS “Wanted” poster Durham Police Cpl. David Addison distributed on March 28? (A description of the poster, including the full text is the third document in this post.)

2) When you became aware of the “Wanted” poster, did you suggest to Cpl. Addison that he amend the poster? I’m thinking in particular of that part of the CS poster which told the Duke and Durham communities:

The victim was paid to dance at the residence located at 610 Buchanan. The Duke Lacrosse Team was hosting a party at the residence. The victim was sodomized, raped, assaulted and robbed. This horrific crime sent shock waves throughout our community.
3) Did any senior Duke administrator seek you out last March or April and object to the content of the “Wanted” poster? If so, can you provide the name(s) of the person(s)?

4) DPD Major Lee Russ informs me that the position of DPD and Durham City regarding the CS "Wanted” poster is that they bear no responsibility for its production and distribution because Addison was acting under a blanket authority Durham CrimeStoppers’ board gave him to issue posters at his discretion. Is that also the position of Durham CS? If not, what is Durham CS’s position concerning the matter?

5) Have you posted a copy of IRS Form 990 for 2006 on the net or made other arrangements to make it easily available to the public as required?

Thank you in advance for your attention to this letter.

And thank you for your service to Durham CrimeStoppers. The Duke lacrosse “Wanted” poster aside, everything I know about Durham CS suggests it’s an effective organization that does much to protect the public.


John in Carolina

Cc: Robert Steel, chair, board of trustees, D U
Richard Brodhead, president, DU
John Burness, senior vice president for public affairs and government relations, DU
Aaron Graves, associate vice president for campus safety and security, DU
David Jarmul, associate vice president of news and communications
Lee Russ, major, Office of the Chief, DPD
David Addison, corporal, Durham CrimeStoppers coordinator, DPD


Texts of Duke lacrosse poster documents

"Wanted" and "Vigilante;" Not the same

Addison Series #1 - "This horrific crime"

Addison Series #2 - "CrimeStoppers will pay cash"

Addison Series #5 - "Major Duke Involvement"

Two ace posts at Liestoppers

John Foster at Liestoppers looks back at the year since Cyrstal Mangum gave her false witness ("Hoax Day – Never Forget"). What Joan says is worth reading. This paragraph in particular caught my attention:

We learned we now live in a society now where certain "intellectuals"...if they don their mantles of political correctness and their breastplates of victim-hood ...need only gibberish and rambling verbal recklessness to suppress any reasoned opposition.

They can write at the level of a remedial 9th grader and reason at the level of a playground bully...but securely hold positions of power and authority at a prestigious American university. They come in all sizes, colors, genders and creeds. They may actually publicly condemn the children of the families who pay their large salaries..yet sail on, undisturbed by any in so-called authority.
Joan nails it, doesn’t she?

She follows up with an important observation and a challenge to never forget.
Never forget what we've observed at Duke University. It's a microcosm of a many-faceted national farce. Never forget!
It’s sad and all too true that so many of our college and university faculties, especially in what are called the social sciences and humanities areas, are very much like Duke’s, where leftist ideology and rush to judgements are often substitutes for scholarly thought.

You can read Joan’s post here.

Liestoppers also has a post, “Nifong Auditions for Dumbest Criminal.” It’s a read, clip and save which begins:
The closer one looks at Defendant Nifong’s responses to the North Carolina State Bar, the more apparent it becomes that his attempts to avoid responsibility for his words and actions are more likely to qualify him for an appearance on America’s Dumbest Criminals than to save his license to practice law.
With a hat tip to KC Johnson, LS details court testimony by DNA expert Brian Meehan that’s damning in and of itself, but which becomes even more damning of Nifong’s case when he “explains” to the State Bar just what Nifong claims Meehan was really saying in court.

LS also found some big time holes in the accounts by Crystal Mangum and her drivers of their activities in the days leading up to the party. Would you believe they all wound up claiming the party took place on a Sunday night, instead of a Monday night.

Again, it’s a “don’t miss” post. Read it here.

A short note to Regulars and Commenters


I plan to respond soon to many of your comments.

Look for a "Talking" post that should be up by 1 am Eastern U.S. time Thursday.

It's Wednesday night now in Australia and I'm headed for bed.



The Churchill Series – Mar. 13, 2007

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Historian Manfred Weidhorn observed:

In the early 1910s, [Churchill] was the civilian head of the Navy. During the diplomatic crisis of August 1914 that led to the beginning of hostilities, he on his own initiative sent the British fleet to its war stations. When war broke out in a few days, the Navy, as Lord Kitchener complimented Churchill, "was ready."

Writing in September 1916 on his daring action two years earlier, Churchill remarked that if, instead of war breaking out, peace had been maintained (as it had indeed been during several war scares in preceding years), he would have been accused of endangering the peace, of acting in excess of his authority, of increasing the nation’s financial liabilities, and of losing his head. He might well have been sacked.

Nothing,[Churchill] concluded, is sooner forgotten than preparation for a danger successfully guarded against.
Well, there you are. Historians Weidhorn and Churchill are agreed on the matter.

What about you?

The full text of Weidhorn’s remarks is here.

Hat tip: The Chruchill Centre

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Coach K: Support was absent

From Raleigh News & Observer reporter Anne Blythe:

Mike Krzyzewski, the face of Duke athletics, was virtually silent last spring as the lacrosse case put the school and its athletic teams under scrutiny.

Now, a year after an escort service dancer alleged being gang-raped at a lacrosse team party, the men's basketball coach says the university should have shown more support for the players.

"The one thing that I wish we would have done is just out, publicly say, 'Look, those are our kids. And we're gonna support 'em, because they're still our kids.' That's what I wish we would have done," Krzyzewski told Bob Costas, a sports commentator who has a television show on HBO. "And I'm not sure that we did -- I don't think we did a good job of that."

For months, bloggers and others have criticized Duke, accusing the university of not standing behind the players as the judicial process unfolded.[…]
Actually the bloggers most of us read have been criticizing Duke for a lot more than “not standing behind the players as the judicial process unfolded.”

The players were savaged in media. Duke was silent. Public officials made statements about the players Duke officials knew were false. They remained silent.

When “Wanted” and “Vigilante” posters endangering the players' safety and that of others circulated at Duke and elsewhere, President Brodhead and the top administrators on “Dick’s team” all remained silent.

When President Brodhead did speak out it was to support Nifong’s plan to put the students on trial where Brodhead said they’d have a chance to prove their innocence. Brodhead spoke at a time when it was widely recognized Nifong was engineering a frame-up.

The N&O story continues:
One segment of "Costas Now," an hour-long sports program that airs tonight at 10, will be a one-on-one interview with Krzyzewski, according to Kris Goddard with HBO Sports media relations. According to excerpts from the transcript, Krzyzewski criticizes Duke professors for their criticisms of big-time sports at the university.

"We had almost 100 professors come out publicly against certain things in athletics," Krzyzewski told Costas, "and I was a little bit shocked at that. But it shows that there's a latent hostility or whatever you want to say towards sports on campus. I thought it was inappropriate, to be quite frank with you."

Krzyzewski voiced similar feelings in June during his first extensive public comments about the impact of the case. He called those who used the occasion to attack athletics "very narrow-minded."

"I don't think there's a latent hostility," said Paula McClain, a political science professor who has questioned the role of big-time sports programs at top-tier research universities. "The questions about athletics are not just related to Duke. I'm sorry Coach K really feels like it's hostility toward athletics and such, because most faculty really appreciate Duke athletics." […]
In a future post I plan to return to Coach K and Professor McClain’s remarks about the attitude of faculty toward Duke athletics. For now I’ll just note what many of you know: there’s considerable individual variation in faculty attitude toward athletics at Duke. The range goes from strongly supportive and admiring to harshly critical and wishing for a major overhaul in Duke’s athletics.

What I think is Coach K’s most important statement comes at the very end of the article:
Krzyzewski, who also bears the title of special assistant to the Duke president, told Costas he did not speak out last spring because Brodhead did not ask him to do so.

"I met with my college president. I told Dick Brodhead, 'If you need me ... you tell me, and then put me in a position where I'm not the basketball coach. But I am that special assistant to you,' " Krzyzewski said. "Dick Brodhead did not bring me in."
Dick Brodhead had a chance to bring in Coach K and didn’t.

Why not? Brodhead brought in just about everyone else from the Bowen-Chambers committee, African and African-American Studies professors, and on and on.

Why freeze out one of the most respected leaders in the Duke community? Especially why would Brodhead freeze out Coach K, when the coach holds the position of assistant to President Brodhead?

Folks, there’s still a great deal more we've yet to learn about the frame-up and its enablement by many at Duke.

KC advances Addison, Duke, CS story

In the past few days KC Johnson has done outstanding work advancing the story concerning Durham Police CPL David Addison, who serves as DPD’s CrimeStoppers Coordinator, and the many connections Durham CS has to Duke University including CS board membership by Duke administrators at the time the “Wanted” poster was produced and distributed.

In "Addison, CrimeStoppers and Duke" KC provides background and focused questions.

"CrimeStoppers Update" is just that.

"CrimeStoppers’ Board" provides information I’ve been looking for including the names of Durham CS Board members.

"CrimeStoppers Follow-Up" contains “A few new items on the CrimeStoppers front, based on a conversation I had today with Dean Sue Wasiolek.”

There you go. You don’t want to miss the conversation with Dean Wasiolek or any of the posts for that matter,

The Churchill Series – Mar. 12, 2007

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Dear Readers,

Most of you know historian Richard Toye and Cambridge University have just announced Toye’s “uncovered” an unpublished article which they attribute to Churchill, while acknowledging it was “ghosted.” The article dates from 1937.

In the promo and media interviews Toye all but calls Churchill an anti-Semite.

I reported and commented on Toye, Cambridge’s promo and the subsequent media frenzy in “Churchill gets Nifonged.”

The Cambridge announcement comes just days before the publication of Toye’s book dealing with the relationship between Churchill and British statesman Lloyd George.

This is not the first time Toye and Cambridge have teamed up to announce a Churchill “discovery.”

On Nov. 28, 2006, Cambridge University announced to the world:

Dr Richard Toye, a Lecturer in History at the University of Cambridge, has found that the phrase “The Gathering Storm” – used by Churchill to depict the rise of Hitler’s Germany – had in fact been conjured up by Wells decades earlier in The War Of The Worlds, which depicts an attack on Britain by Martians.
Imagine that!

Before Cambridge’s announcement I’ll bet most of you thought “the gathering storm” was a very common phrase “conjured up” for centuries by, for example, ship captains looking at menacing horizons.

Who knew it was a phrase stolen by Churchill from H. G. Wells?

I’ll bet none of you can wait to hear what Toye and Cambridge University discover about Churchill's use of the phrase “their finest hour.”

In a day or two I’ll post further concerning Toye, Cambridge and Churchill.

Meanwhile, with Cambridge’s “conjured up” assertion regarding “the gathering storm” in mind, I’m reposting the following series post which first ran on Feb. 6, 2006.


On January 30, 1946, Churchill was in Miami where historian Martin Gilbert says:
(Churchill) had a long talk with Emery Reves, who before the war had insured the wide circulation of his articles throughout Europe, about the publishing aspect of his war memoirs.

"I have not forgotten what you have done for me before the war" Churchill told Reves, "and I shall want you to handle it"

Over the next decade, and more, Reves made sure that the memoirs obtained the widest possible circulation, translation and financial benefit.
Shortly after Churchill began work on his memoirs, tension developed between the two as Reves made numerous criticisms of Churchill's drafts.

Churchill, you'll recall, often said that while he liked to learn, he didn't like being taught.

But things came right in the end. Reves was even able to persuade Churchill to change the title he'd selected for the first volume. Thus "The Downward Path" became "The Gathering Storm."
Reader's Note: Some will reasonably wonder whether Churchill actually said
"have done for me before the war" instead of "did for me before the war."

The Churchill quote, along with the rest of Gilbert's text quoted here, appears on page 864 of his Churchill: A Life.

Monday, March 12, 2007

Churchill gets Nifonged

The Urban Dictionary defines Nifonged as: the railroading or harming of a person with no justifiable cause, except for one's own gain.
From Reuters:

A historian has uncovered a pre-World War Two article Winston Churchill wrote about the persecution of Jews but then decided not to publish.

In the long lost article, the wartime leader disapproved of the treatment they experienced, but did say of the Jews: "They have been partly responsible for the antagonism from which they suffer."

Cambridge University lecturer Richard Toye, reflecting on his find, said: "While most people would accept that Churchill was no anti-Semite, this sheds fascinating new light on his views about Jews which were very inconsistent."

While researching in the university's Churchill archives, the historian uncovered the unpublished article in a pile of proofs and press cuttings. "It was a dramatic moment," he said […]
Quite a story if it was true.

But Toye didn’t uncover a “long lost article [by] the wartime leader;” and the article doesn’t reveal Churchill to have been a closet anti-Semite, which Toye all but says he was.

From the International Herald Tribune:
[...] Geoffrey Alderman, a British historian who is a columnist for The Jewish Chronicle in London, said in an interview Sunday that "we have known about this for some time" because the article appears in a collection of Churchill's writings compiled by Martin Gilbert, Churchill's official biographer, that was published in the 1980s.

Alderman added: "It does not challenge" the prevailing view of Churchill as supportive of the Jews. "I think it's a flash in the pan."

But Toye said Churchill had sought to publish the article in 1937 in Britain and the United States. Churchill "was apparently happy to put his name to this article in 1937" and was "happy to endorse sentiments contained in articles that were written for him," Toye said.

Gilbert said Churchill had refused to permit the article to be published. He identified the ghost-writer as Adam Marshall Diston, a member of Oswald Mosley's British Union of Fascists. It was not clear why Churchill commissioned him to write an article in his name.[...]
And this from the TimesOnline:
[…] Gilbert said Richard Toye, the lecturer who “found” the article and includes it in a new book, Lloyd George and Churchill ( It’s to be released Mar. 16 in the UK by Macmillan. JinC), must have failed to consult Gilbert’s compilation of Churchill’s writings published in the 1980s, which describes it.

“I’m amazed. My book would have been on the shelf in the same library. I immediately recognised the name of the article,” said Gilbert, whose own new book, Churchill and the Jews, will be published this summer.
Gilbert no doubt was being more than a touch ironic when he said he was “amazed” Toye hadn’t consulted his book.

Besides having at-hand access to Gilbert's book, Toye could very easily have contacted Gilbert, the world’s leading Churchill scholar, to ask Gilbert what he knew about the “long lost article.” Serious scholars do that sort of thing all the time; and Gilbert has a reputation for being very responsive to other scholars’ inquiries.

But if Toye had consulted Gilbert’s book (I'm assuming Toye didn’t consult Gilbert’s book and then later “forget” he did.) or contacted him, Toye and Cambridge University couldn’t now be trumpting, on the eve of publication of Toye’s book, that he'd “unearthed” the “long lost aricle.”

In a TimesOnline op-ed, “Racism is too real to be used as a cheap gibe,” Stephen Pollard, Chairman of the European Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism, gives Toye some knocks and then reminds us that unjustified insinuations of anti-Semitism serve to deaden us to real instances of it which, unfortunately, are on the rise in Britian.

Scott Johnson at Powerline posted on the story. I hope you give his post a look.

In a day or two I’ll post again on Toye’s blatantly promotional claims. I'll also post asking why Cambridge University has been helping hype them.

Notes from Australia – Post 2

Readers Note: My father told me a little bit of knowledge wasn’t a dangerous thing so long as I remembered it was only a little bit of knowledge.

With his words in mind, this first-time visitor to Australia offers “Notes from Australia – Post 2.” (See here for Post 1)

I’ve been in 4 supermarkets so far. Each gave a fair amount of shelf space to beer brewing kits, brewing sugars, yeasts, etc. In one supermarket the brewing section must have been about 15 feet long and included all shelves top to bottom.

Friends here in Brisbane say a fair number of people all over Australia home brew.

I’m not sure why that is but it can’t be because they don’t have excellent Australian –made commercial beers and lagers. I’m not much of a beer drinker but I’ve tasted about 6 of them and, IMO, they’ve all been excellent.

Let’s go from "excellent" to “brilliant.”

If you’ve spent any time in England, you know the English often use “brilliant” but not the way American do. “Brilliant” in London or York usually means “very good” or even “thank you.” You can have “brilliant” fish and chips, and if you offer to help, you may hear “brilliant.”

The Australians don’t use “brilliant” for “very good” or “thank you” nearly as often as the English but I hear it used that way now and again.

There’s a shop in Brisbane that sells all kinds of nuts in small and bulk amounts. It’s called “Mick’s Nuts.”

More soon.

Sunday, March 11, 2007

Aussie joins JinC edit staff

This blogger couldn’t manage without many excellent editors

JinC Regulars know what I mean. Many of them are themselves JinC editors. I can never thank them enough for pointing out and helping correct my mistakes.

To date the edit staff has been almost entirely American. But an Aussie has just joined the staff and I want to welcome him and congratulate him on the nice work he did his first day on the job.

In a Notes from Australia post I mentioned that tic-tack- toe in Australia is called “oughts and crosses.”

But it’s "noughts and crosses,” as Alan who lives in Australia gently reminded me.

Thank you, Alan, and welcome to the JinC editorial staff.

Addison Series # 5 – “Major Duke Involvement"

Readers' Note: If you're a frequent visitor here you may want to skip down to the star line. ************

Cpl. David Addison is a veteran Durham Police officer whose regular assignment is Coordinator for Durham CrimeStoppers, described as an independent nonprofit organization.

In late March 2005 Addison served for some days as DPD's spokesperson for the Duke lacrosse case; during which time Addison repeatedly told the public a “brutal rape” and other crimes were committed at a party hosted by Duke lacrosse players. Addison also wrote and distributed the text of the Durham CrimeStoppers Duke lacrosse “Wanted” poster which declared:

The Duke Lacrosse Team was hosting a party at the residence. The victim was sodomized, raped, assaulted and robbed. This horrific crime sent shock waves throughout our community.
If you're new to the Addison Series, please refer to the previous series posts at the end of this post. They're in chronilogical order, first to last.

Until today I’d planned to end the series with a post, “Sue who,” which will discuss individuals and organizations against whom one, some or all 46 white members of Duke’s 2006 Men’s lacrosse team appear to have cause to bring civil suits for slander and libel. I still plan to post “Sue who” but it may be delayed.

The reason?

Since May 2006 I’ve been trying to find out who the Durham CrimeStoppers Board of Directors were on March 28, 2006 when Durham Police Cpl. David Addison, assigned as Durham CrimeStoppers’ (CS) Coordinator, released to DPD substations, media and others the text of the false and inflammatory CS Duke lacrosse “Wanted” poster.

I wanted to know who the CS board members were because Addison’s DPD supervisor, Maj. Lee Russ, told me when Addison issued the “Wanted” poster he wasn’t acting as a DPD officer; Addison was, according to Russ, acting under a blanket authority the CS board gave him to issue CS posters at his discretion.

So who were the CS board members?

The public needs to hear what they have to say about Addison, CS’s responsibility for the “Wanted” poster and Durham attorney Alec Charns' request on behalf of an unindicted Duke lacrosse player for a full, formal apology by DPD and Durham City for their responsibility for the “Wanted” poster which Charns says libeled the Duke students.

Charns is also seeking a formal investigation by DPD into the poster's production and distribution.

DPD and Durham City insist responsibility for the “Wanted” poster rests with Addison and Durham CS.

Despite many attempts since last May, I haven't learned for certain the name of anyone who was a CS board member last March when Addison issued the “Wanted” poster.

Addison's never returned numerous voice mails. The contact number for CS is the same as his. Messages left for CS were never returned. Russ told me last June he didn’t know when or where CS’s board met. He said he couldn’t offer any help beyond suggesting that I keep doing what I was doing.

I’d just about convinced myself Durham CS was a “letterhead” organization with DPD basically calling “the shots” while a few “good-will” citizens lent their names to fund-raising letters and “board sign-offs.”

But that changed in the last two days as I began learning about Duke University’s extensive involvement with Durham CS.

I want to tell you what I've learned, and how I learned it.

My learning started with a comment from a reader self-IDing as “Cederford” who said Duke’s dean of students, Sue Wasiolek, and Robert “Bob” Dean, director of Duke’s Police Department, were Durham CS members. Cederford didn’t say when they were CS board members or cite a source. So I googled Wasiolek and Dean.

Among Wasiolek’s returns was a Duke Alumni Association listing of it’s 2006-2007 board of directors of which Wasiolek is one. She’s described as “involved in the boards of Durham CrimeStoppers, ...” (see here, scroll to page 28).

Among Dean’s returns was a Duke News announcement dated Feb. 7, 2006, just five weeks before Crystal Mangum made her March 14 false witness which many at Duke and in Durham eagerly embraced, and used in ways that endangered most directly the 46 Duke students on the lacrosse team, but also put others in the community at greater risk of violence by unstable individuals and hate groups.

The Duke News’ announcement concerning Dean began:
Robert H. “Bob” Dean has been named Director of the Duke University Police Department, university officials announced

Dean, who served the Duke community for 41 years before retiring and returning last year as interim director, will lead the department’s day-to-day operations and report to Aaron Graves, vice president for campus safety and security.
Near the end of the announcement there was this:
Dean has remained active in public safety and the community by serving as chairman of Durham CrimeStoppers.
The returns don’t necessarily mean that when the "Wanted" posted was produced and distributed Dean was Durham CS chairman and Wasiolek a CS board member.

Duke Police Director Dean may have resigned as CS board chairman and member in the weeks between his appointment last February and Addison’s poster’s production late last March.

Dean of Students Wasiolek may not have joined the CS board until after March.

I'll say more about their CS involvement at the end of this post.

Within a few hours of receipt of Cederford’s comment, I received an email from a friend with many Duke connections as well as some DPD connections. The friend knew of my efforts to learn whether Durham CS had ever, as a non-profit engaged in fund-raising, filed reports with the NC Secretary of State’s office.

I worked with two public information officers in the SofS’s office. We'd turned-up no Durham CS filings but the PIOs had informed me that in was not clear whether Durham CS was in fact required to file any documents with the SofS’s office.

My friend gave me a link here and said it wouldn’t look like much but if I kept “pushing” it would yield a big payoff.

The link is to a June 1983 pro-forma Durham CS filing with the SofS’s office that I and the two PIOs missed.

The filing contains the name and address of only one person who isn't even identified as a CS board member.

But I knew right away who the person was as would any Dukie from the 70s, 80s and through the mid- 90s. It was Paul Dumas.

Beginning in 1971 Dumas served for twenty-five years as Duke’s Police Director. He retired in 1996 and passed away in March, 2001. His family asked that, in lieu of flowers, those wishing to make a contribution in his memory do so to “any CrimeStoppers organization.”

I contacted some Duke people who said Dumas had been a passionate supporter of CS throughout his career. One suggested Dumes very likely encouraged Wasiolek and Dean to get involved in Durham CS. “Paul was always 'recruiting' for CS. He worked with them for years.”

Other Duke people said their impressions were that the university had over the years worked very closely with Durham CS and provided it with considerable material support. “Duke is a dominant presence within Durham CS. I don’t want to go as far as saying Duke controls it, but it’s been at least close to that for many years. Have you looked at back issues of Ten Fourteen? They’re on the web.”

I hadn’t looked at any back issues of Ten Fourteen because I didn’t know it's DUPD’s monthly newsletter for its staff and their families. But I started looking.

The April ’05 Ten Fourteen contains a CrimeStoppers article that includes this:
Duke Police has worked for years with Durham CrimeStoppers, but this year, the Duke Police investigations division is expanding its efforts to raise awareness in the Durham community to help solve campus crimes.

The collaborative includes a more formalized partnership, so cases don’t go unnoticed by CrimeStoppers. David Addison, Durham police corporal and CrimeStoppers coordinator, has started attending a Duke investigations meeting once a week to hear about cases and share information, and Duke Police First Sergeant Greg Stotsenberg is serving as the CrimeStoppers liaison. […]

Major Phyllis Cooper, commander of the Duke investigations division, said the department will mostly enlist CrimeStoppers help with more serious crimes such as robbery, assault and felony theft on campus. […]

“We need everyone’s efforts in solving serious crimes that occur at Duke,” Cooper said. “We want officers and members of the community to remember CrimeStoppers is available.”

In the event of a felony crime on campus, the Duke Police investigator assigned to the case would contact and meet with Addison, the Durham police corporal and CrimeStoppers coordinator.

Posters would be created and distributed on and off campus and an alert would be sent through a Durham city email list, as well as other media sources.
DUPD's Nov. ’05 Ten Fourteen includes this news item:
Officer Christine Gwyn and Sgt. Greg Stotsenberg are filling in as interim coordinators for Durham CrimeStoppers while the coordinator, Durham Police Cpl. David Addison attends training.

Gwyn contributed in October when the second of Durham’s Ten Most Wanted was apprehended; in November, Stotsenberg fills in. The duties include sending email notices for crime-solving tips, taking confidential tips and assisting with a city TV program about Durham’s Ten Most Wanted.

There you have what I've learned so far about Duke's involvement with Durham CrimeStoppers and how I leaned it.

Like any decent person, I strongly support Duke's involvement with CrimeStoppers' personnel and activities that contribute to public safety and the just enforcement of laws.

But Duke involvement in the "Wanted" poster is a very different matter that needs prompt, full and public examination by the university.

Who but the most ardent board of trustee Brodhead supporter or an apologist for the faculty Group of 88 would fail to vigorously condemn anyone on Duke's payroll who had anything to do with the CS "Wanted" poster?

Dean of students Sue Wasiolek and police director Bob Dean are arguably the two Duke administrators most responsible for student safety.

That either or both may have had CS board involvement during or around the time the "Wanted" poster circulated on campus and elsewhere should be cause for outrage.

Duke trustee chair Robert Steel needs to ask dean Wasiolek and police director Dean to explain their involvement with Durham CrimeStoppers and what, if anything, they did once they learned the "Wanted" poster was out there and endangering students and others in the community.

This is not a time to be playing games or stonewalling for members of "the Brodhead team."

Previous Addison Series posts:

“The Cpl. Addison Series.”

“Addison Series #1" - "This horrific crime”

"Addison Series #2" - "CrimeStoppers will pay cash"

"Addison Series #3" - "Not my poster"

“Addison Series #4 – “They call it ‘squeezing.’”