You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Culture Wars
Violence at Columbia
2006-10-07
The President of Columbia University, Lee Bollinger, responds here.
Thousands of New Yorkers spent their mornings yesterday clicking on a video on the Internet showing the astounding melee that was permitted to take place on Columbia University's campus Wednesday evening.
“The violence erupted when a crowd led by the student chapter of the International Socialist Organization rushed a stage where the founder of the Minutemen, Jim Gilchrist, tried to deliver a speech...”
The violence erupted when a crowd led by the student chapter of the International Socialist Organization rushed a stage where the founder of the Minutemen, Jim Gilchrist, tried to deliver a speech. They could see the university's own police failing to take action to defend the rights of the speaker, who was being hosted by the campus Republican club. And they had to be wondering, as we were, where is the adult supervision on Morningside Heights.

“The video of the event shows campus police officers — paid for by the Columbia College Republicans — standing by just feet away as students overturned tables and chairs onstage and proceeded to attack Mr. Gilchrist and his fellow Minuteman, Marvin Stewart.”
It's not that some Columbia students chose to disagree with Mr. Gilchrist — this newspaper does, too. It would have been entirely appropriate for school administrators to allow students to protest peaceably outside the lecture hall or to host a competing event. The university's willingness to allow this event to devolve into pandemonium, however, speaks volumes about its commitment to fostering open debate. The video of the event shows campus police officers — paid for by the Columbia College Republicans — standing by just feet away as students overturned tables and chairs onstage and proceeded to attack Mr. Gilchrist and his fellow Minuteman, Marvin Stewart.

The failure of Columbia's administration to make even the meekest effort to secure what it knew would be a heated environment in order to allow open debate is shocking. Its protestations after the violence were unconvincing. "We defend the right to peaceful protest and expression of opposing views," a spokesman for Columbia, Robert Hornsby, told us. "But it is never acceptable for anyone to physically take to a stage and interrupt a speaker." So why did campus police officers stand idly by as the physical intimidation of a speaker ensued?
Posted by:Fred

#4  SOP of the progressists.
Intellectual terrorism at its finest : either you shut them up by demonizing them ("racists", "nazis", "fascists",...), with the PC-followers then forced to cast them out, or you just bash their heads in (it's right to use violence, you're the Good Ones, History goes your way, and you're the Progress, anyone opposing you is evil, and whatever is done to them is fair game).

For an example closer to home, the whole "CPE" french students demonstrations earlier this year were deeply marred by undemocratic procedures and other agit-prop, IE they really were a show of force by very efficient and well trained trostkysts and other leftis... a small minority, but with true and tried techniques, including supressing free speech by violence and (organized) mob rule.
Posted by: anonymous5089   2006-10-07 09:56  

#3  Two of these Columbia student asshats were on H & C last night. Actually, they were both pretty hot. Too bad about their politics. But I suspect many of the young, white males who joined in this typical Left-Fascist "direct action" really had their sights on the "Hippy P***y."
Posted by: Lancasters Over Dresden   2006-10-07 09:19  

#2  I wonder if their alumni contributions will increase or decrease as a result of all this wonderful publicity. I would think 'decrease', because statistically the alums who made (or even preserved) enough money to be making donations would be smart enough to doubt the wisdom of that these days. I quit giving to my old schools shortly after 9-11 after watching their 'Blame America' rallies. I don't know if they've noticed.
Posted by: Glenmore   2006-10-07 01:27  

#1  I'm just going to keep saying this. Those who support illegal immigration are immoral. They care nothing a system that encourages them to cross a dangerous border, where they are often robbed, raped and many have died. And once they get here they are forced to live in a shadow world where they are exploited.

Nor do these same "enlightened" people care that the arguments for allowing cheap labor risk their lives to cross and work for cheap pay are the same arguments that were used to support slavery: The economy would collapse without them; the little brown folk are willing to do jobs that Americans won't do; the cost of my lettuce would go up;

They can preen all they want to. They are the supporters of a very shameful arrangement.
Posted by: anon   2006-10-07 00:17  

00:00