Ward Churchill, UnIndian, NonPainter Extraordinaire!

Investigating Ward Churchill is like going through Dante’s circles of hell- the deeper you go the scummier it gets. I’ve already established that he:

1. Lied on his application to Colorado University, and throughout his career, by claiming he was Native American when he is not.

2. Lied about source material in an academic paper.

Now he is busted for selling copied artwork as an original composition, (twice, so far) and for copyright infringement.

This post by Michelle Malkin shows two demonstrable cases of art fraud. Take a look. Now, regarding the ‘Winter Attack’ painting, an LGF reader created an overlay of the original painting and Churchill’s rip off of it, proving the two images are virtually identical mirror images.

When questioned about this by CBS4 Churchill-

acknowledged his artwork was based on the Thomas Mails piece. And, he said he disclosed that during his initial release of the serigraph.

"It is an original art work by me, after Thomas Mails," Churchill said. "The fact that the purchaser was ignorant of the reality of what was perfectly publicly stated at the time the edition was printed is not my responsibility."

Set aside the idea that a flipped original image with a few tinting effects is “original artwork,” and the fact that Churchill feels no responsibility to inform potential buyers that his “original artwork” is little more than a photocopy- is there any reason to believe this proven liar really did publicly state the nature of his “original artwork” when it was printed?

A closer examination of the Churchill piece revealed there is no credit given to the original artist. Churchill also refused to provide CBS4 with documentation that would prove his claims.

Obviously the answer is no. But even if Churchill did provide proof, and even if that proof does pass the LGF Microsoft Word overlay test, it wouldn’t really matter.

But even if it exists, it wouldn't be enough to protect Churchill from copyright infringement unless he had permission from the copyright holder.

Is that likely?

When contacted at his home in North Carolina, Ryan Mails, the son of the late Thomas Mails said the family still retained the copyrights to the drawings of the Mystic Warriors book, and that his father fiercely defended the copyrights.

"My father invested a great deal of himself in his work, and from that he developed a great fierceness in defending his work," Mails' son said. "I cannot imagine he would ever grant permission to anyone to copy one of his pieces."

I can just hear Churchill's defense... "I took an image of indigenous people created by a white man to make money and changed it. Who stole from who? The whites steal our culture and make money from it- I made money from THEIR theft and yet I am accused of being a thief!" Of course that defense rests upon the idea that Churchill is an Indian, which he is not!

Ward Churchill- Champion of Academic Freedom, Tenure, and etc.!!! Maybe tenure is a bad idea. Of course you don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater- but what if the baby is a little shit? Well... Certainly a debate regarding tenure ought to be opened up.