<p>(I'm terrible at linking, so it this doesn't work, please copy and paste.)</p>
<p>This is quite disturbing. I don't think I'd want my hard-earned money going to this Ivy.</p>
<p>Umm, I watched it and couldn't understand anything except the blonde man at the end. It was all unintelligible. What is the Minuteman project?</p>
<p>Apparently they are a group of US citizens who are stationed at the borders with Canada and Mexico, and they alert the Border Patrol when they see illegals crossing our borders. </p>
<p>The leaders of the Minuteman Project were invited to speak at Columbia, and they were mobbed by the Chicano Caucus and other student groups. The student groups were yelling, "Racists" and "KKK" at one of the speakers (who is a black ordained minister), they stormed the stage, keeping another speaker from talking, and apparently some people got hurt. Don't know who started it. </p>
<p>The behavior was disgraceful, as displayed by the video.</p>
<p>I don't understand why the free exchange of ideas is not tolerated in so many universities, which are what they are supposed to be about. "Free speech for me, but not for thee," I guess. </p>
<p>55 years ago, Columbia offered my father a full-ride track and baseball scholarship, and he refused it, because he thought the school was far too liberal, even back then. Amazing, because he was the first in his desperately poor family to even get beyond eighth grade. </p>
<p>I'd sure like to know more about what happened. If anyone else has any more details, please let me know.</p>
<p>My guess is that the school would sanction students who acted in the way you describe. The school is has many excellent programs. I always feel that the bigger the school the more it is likely to have a diversity of viewpoints. I don't think that group is necessarily representative of the whole.</p>
<p>I'm not holding my breath that the students involved will be sanctioned. Somehow these university presidents always seem to get cold feet about doing that.</p>
<p>But the students should be made to be responsible for their actions, nonetheless.</p>
<p>The article in the student newspaper, the Spectator, this morning, which was written by someone present at the incident, made it seem like there was much more antagonizing going back and forth which led to the incident. There was a planned protest involving a sign at the speech, but clearly violence was not on anyone's agenda as attested to by quotes from the leaders of several of the student groups involved.</p>
<p>If they did "attack" then they got a little too excited. Some of the word choice was also a bit extreme. Otherwise I think what they did was great. I also disagree with the minuteman project and I think that their chanting was good, but perhaps not their use of psychical brutality (especially to an invited guest). </p>
<p>This is hard to say lol. Ok...I think the idea was good and what they did near the end, but not the whole "physical" factor, if there was one. </p>
<p>Maybe a better way would have been for them to stand on their chairs in silence and turn their backs to the stage. That woulda been good stuff...</p>
<p>
[quote]
My guess is that the school would sanction students who acted in the way you describe.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>SuNa, Sorry, my brain is so worn down. Are you guessing the school will impose sanctions, ie, punish the students, or are you guessing the school will endorse or officially approve their behavior?</p>
<p>Personally, unless I totally misunderstand what the minutemen are doing, it is vastly perferable to alternatives like building a 3 tier wall along the border of our friendly neighboring country.</p>
<p>Brandon's mom, fit is very important and it's wise of you to know which schools would make you uncomfortable as the bill payer. My kids won't be going to Liberty University, and yours won't be going to Columbia, ain't nothing wrong with that.</p>
<p>"Personally, unless I totally misunderstand what the minutemen are doing, it is vastly perferable to alternatives like building a 3 tier wall along the border of our friendly neighboring country." </p>
<ul>
<li>hunting down and sometimes even shooting...</li>
</ul>
<p>Especially when we were ALL immigrants at some time! It's bs!</p>
<p>I think it's rather funny that they call liberals the violent ones. Talk about hypocritical. (lol I feel like Devil's Advocate)</p>
<p>The Minutemen don't hunt down and shoot. They spot illegals (not immigrants) coming across the border illegaly into this country and notify the Border Patrol. </p>
<p>And yes - in this case it looks like the liberals were the violent and intolerant ones.</p>
<p>Well obviously they were, but that one guy complained about how liberals always do that and u would never c them doing it...</p>
<p>K watever I'm tired of playing Devil's A</p>
<p>MomOFour - "My kids won't be going to Liberty University, and yours won't be going to Columbia, ain't nothing wrong with that."</p>
<p>My kids wouldn't be going to Liberty U either, btw. I don't know what would make you say that. Actually my daughter goes to Northeastern, and my son will (hopefully) be going to Notre Dame. </p>
<p>I'm not so concerned about the liberal leanings of the school. But you mostly see and hear of intolerance for (most right-leaning) free speech in the elite schools in this country, and that makes me said because I would think we would want our best and brightest students to have the opportunity to hear all points of view in a safe, peaceful setting. </p>
<p>No one forced these students to come listen to the Minutemen. So why didn't they just let them talk? It generated a whole lot more interest in and good publicity for the Minutemen, and made the students look bad.</p>
<p>IF, and I repeat IF, those in positions of authority do nothing, unfortunately it will be a reflection on the entire school.</p>
<p>Kind of like how the Foley situation is shaping up - blame the perpetrator, blame the organization as a whole, blame its leadership.</p>
<p>I watched the film on Youtube and students rushed the stage in protest - then there was some pushing and shoving. No one was "attacked" as some media are reporting.</p>
<p>To be honest, I am a hypocrite in that I would not have been pleased if my daughter had (possibly) jeopardized her college career by participating in the protest but on a certain level I am glad that there are passionate and politically charged young people out there taking a stand rather than just focussed pre-professional types with their eyes on the prize. JMHO</p>
<p>Ellen, it is great that they took a stand but they didn't allow the "other side" to take a stand, which is the issue. They could have taken a stand in a more respectful way allowing each party to be heard. They could have stood outside the entrance with signs. They could have taken a stand in a Q and A if there was one. They could have had someone ouside the building on a blow horn with their messages. But just like they wanted to take a stand and be heard and free speech and all that....they needed to let the invited speaker do the same. That's the problem with it. </p>
<p>I can't tell from the video exactly what happened either, like you. I don't see "attacks" in the video but I'd go by first hand accounts more than what the video revealed. Nobody should rush a stage or physically interact with invited speakers no matter how much they disagree. Taking a stand is great. But how one takes it, matters. And not allowing the other point of view to be heard is not right. </p>
<p>I don't think this is about Columbia per se, and doesn't represent the student body. But those present who conducted themselves in this way, were not respectful of free speech. On the one hand, they wanted to be heard but quelled another point of view from being heard. There is irony in that.</p>
<p>Yes, as one of those Columbia parents wondering where the next payment is coming from, it does not shock me too much. Like Ellen, I am glad I did not see my daughter on the stage (although I miss her so much, a sight of her would have been nice). On the other hand, this kind of protest happened on college campuses everywhere in my time, even here in the Deep South. I remember seeing a crowd get totally out of hand at the LBJ library opening in Austin around 1971. I know another person who is one of the most staid members of our community who used to belong to SDS and shoot water pistols at the ROTC on the LSU campus.
On the other hand, I remember how frightened I was in Austin that day and that is what would worry me for my daughter. I want her to think about issues and express opinions, but I sure don't want her to get hurt doing it. I will be interested to see if Columbia deals with the safety issue.</p>
<p>"but on a certain level I am glad that there are passionate and politically charged young people out there taking a stand rather than just focussed pre-professional types with their eyes on the prize. "</p>
<p>EXACTLY. This is what I would be proud of. I'd WANT to go to a college where people have opinions on politics and life and aren't just looking to get a good job.</p>
<p>Plus the only violence I saw was from one of the people on stage grabbing one of the signs and throwing it at a protestor.</p>
<p>This type of thing is nothing new.</p>
<p>I remember when I was at Berkeley back in the early '80s. The university invited then Ambassador to the UN Jeanne Kirkpatrick to speak. She was shouted down to the point where she couldn't even begin her remarks, while university police and administration officials stood by and watched. The shouting down was widely balleyhood in the student newspaper the following day. Popular opinion was "how dare she come here to speak".</p>
<p>I knew then that the inmates ran the asylum. Berkeley, home of the "free speech movement". Yup, you were free to speak your mind if you agreed with the unruly mob.</p>
<p>There are a few principled leaders who truly understand the ideals they espouse. The loyal followers usually trample the ideal they try to implement.</p>
<p>It's ironic that these students who I'm sure believe they were simply exercising their 'rights to free speech' were trouncing that very idea by not allowing others to exercise free speech. It would have been far more appropriate and persuasive of them to have simply debated the presenters or to have held their own subsequent rally to espouse their perspective. I suppose it's easier to just rush the stage and try to shut down anyone with an opposing viewpoint to yours though. I don't admire these students' behavior at all. And if conservative students were to do something similar if Michael Moore was presenting, I'd have the same opinion of them.</p>