Academic freedom can do without this

I have noted with disgust and even loathing that Ward Churchill, the professor from the University of Colorado who has recently achieved notoriety for calling victims of 9/11 the equivalent of Nazis, has been invited to speak at the University of Hawaii ("Lawmaker wants speaker blocked," Star-Bulletin, Feb. 19).

I feel that the use of our tax monies to give an additional forum to a man to whom I can only attribute the term "traitor" is absolutely unconscionable! I sincerely hope that anyone who reads this and feels similarly will take all steps possible to cut this appearance off at the pass.

I have been a resident of Hawaii for 30 years. Also, I hold a B.S. from Lehigh, an M.S. from the University of Cincinnati, and a Ph.D. from Penn State, degrees that took me almost 10 years to attain, so I feel I have a bit of background in "academia." On the other hand, it had been determined that Churchill is not an Indian, although he has professed to be, and he doesn't even have a doctorate that he can claim as a credential! To hide the kind of actions, and the philosophy, expounded by this man under the umbrella of "academic freedom" simply shows how low our academic system has fallen.

Don't waste money on hate-filled professor

I also believe in the right of free speech. I served 28 years in uniform to help protect that right.

But, I think, the University of Hawaii's invitation to University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill to speak on campus is a waste of taxpayers' money and a distortion of that constitutional right.

All the anti-America invective he has been spewing can be found anywhere on the Internet. Why spend taxpayer money just to hear him voice his same old, tired, distorted views in person?

Is it because UH professor Robert Perkinson, whose American Studies department is a sponsor of Churchill's visit, is in agreement with his hate-filled viewpoint?

Will an opposing viewpoint be presented by a spokesperson for the victims of 9/11?

Will Churchill finally provide some proof to his absurd allegations?

Is the university just trying to get exposure on Fox News?

Free speech works both ways. If Churchill wants to come to Hawaii to spread his vile, hate-filled theories, then he should pay his own expenses.

The Legislature should take a long, hard look at this and, if taxpayer money is being used to pay the man for his travel, lodging and speaking fees, they should require that the same amount be withheld from the American Studies department on their next budget.

This is an invitation that should have never been made. All the aloha extended to Churchill will be repaid with a hate-filled speech, which should play well to the anti-American crowd at UH, but not to all the citizens of Hawaii.

Free speech doesn't mean having to hear it

The extension of an invitation to a professor who has ignorantly compared some 9/11 victims to a calculating, convicted, genocidal war criminal should be laughable.

The president of the University of Hawaii himself has said the remarks by Ward Churchill were "wildly inaccurate." As such I can only presume the academic strength of a UH degree is bolstered by hiring speakers who can make up whatever comparisons they like, regardless of the facts. What is next, a speech by KKK members or members of the Flat Earth Society?

This issue is all about free speech. Churchill can say and publish whatever drivel he wants. My freedom is in not having to pay to hear it. UH President David McClain's freedom allows him to keep people like Churchill away from his students.

I have to ask, however, if McClain would have extended this invitation had the murderers of 9/11 struck Oahu instead of a place thousands of miles away.

Senator does support freedom of speech

Regarding the scheduled appearance of University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill at the University of Hawaii, I am astonished and greatly disappointed by the invitation and subsequent events, including insinuations that Senator Fred Hemmings is trying to block free speech. I went over to Fred's house and saw the letter he wrote and in the opening sentence he expresses a firm belief in the principle of free speech!

Hemmings' position is that, while freedom of speech in public places is guaranteed in our great country, we should not be inviting persons with a documented history of gain by falsehood to make use of our taxpayer-provided facilities. I am in complete agreement.

Hawaii is a leader in wave energy

I was very pleased to see your Feb. 13 business section article on wave energy. As someone who has been actively promoting this renewable energy resource for a number of years, I was heartened by this excellent piece on the potential of wave energy both locally and globally.

It mentions the tentative forays being made into this field on the national level and the fact that Hawaii is one of the sites selected as ideal for this technology.

The Electric Power Research Institute (mentioned in your article) reports that Hawaii is the best location for producing wave energy. Therefore it is disheartening that the United States is far behind Europe in researching and developing this technology even though our location here is one of the best in terms of wave consistency and strength. Recognizing this, I began working on bringing this technology to Hawaii about three years ago.

On a similar tract, the Navy has been testing a wave energy device in my district off the shores of Marine Corps Base Hawaii-Kaneohe Bay, the first of its kind in the United States.

Wave energy is an enormous resource which, when utilized, will help reduce our utility costs and foreign oil dependence. We here in Hawaii are held captive by our nation's dependency on imported fossil fuels. Seeking out and increasing our usage of alternative energy sources is an important social and political change which will enable us to have a stronger, more stable local economy while protecting the environment from the polluting effects inherent in the use and transport of fossil fuels.

A good rail system is well worth the cost

I have seen (and ridden) both good and bad rail systems. Both the San Francisco Bay area BART and the Washington, D.C., Metro are examples of good rail systems that I went out of my way to use. Rail transit (like a ferry) allows the rider the opportunity to do something other than drive, such as reading on the way to and from work. I used BART for a couple of years for an extra hour of study time every work day toward my master's degree ... 250 hours of extra study time every year!

The system needs to be convenient -- on time, frequent, run 24-hours (or nearly so), with clean, well-lighted, safe trains and stations, and adequate parking at each station. BART had a nice touch -- the ability to take bikes on trains during non-rush hour times. It's nice if the cost of a ride is less than the cost of driving.

New York and Boston had the counter-examples. Dirty, ugly, unsafe. Any viable transit proposal should include maintenance and policing of stations and trains.

While Kauai doesn't have the population density to profit much from a good rail system, Oahu does. I, for one, would use such a system if went from the airport into downtown Honolulu, Waikiki and Manoa.