Tancredo Protestors Turn Violent *EDITED*

[Hatuey]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

There was a time, not so many decades ago, that students and their professors invited all manner of people with widely diverse views to speak at universities and they usually extended invitations when approached by people who wanted to speak. The speakers who represented everything from Klansmen to Marxists to Communists to Civil Rights Activists to Animal Rights Activists to believers in UFOs were all extended the utmost courtesy as guests of the university. Students attended the assembly, asked polite questions as appropriate, took notes, and then entered into intense discussions in their civic or poli-sci or journalism classes later where the speakers views were either affirmed or ripped apart.

It was unheard of to treat a guest on campus disrespectfully, however.

I think modern university students could benefit enormously from a policy like that which encourages diversity of ideas and opinions and provides education by showing all sides of any given issue.

Yup agreed.

 

[jamesrage]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

I think you missed my point:mrgreen:

I understand it now after seeing him trying to deny contradict himself.

 

[Billo_Really]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Originally posted by TOT:
No they should be charged under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 for violating the speaker and the students freedom of speech and assembly, just like they did to prosecute the Klan during the civil rights era and reconstrution. Hay hay ho ho leftist Nazi's got to go hay hay ho ho.

You got my vote.

 

[RightinNYC]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

A hilarious email sent out in response to this story by someone from the federalist society at NYU:

Rep. Tom Tancredo explained his views about immigration at a Michigan law school yesterday. The students quietly handed out fliers critiquing Tancredo outside the room where he spoke. During the Q & A, several students and one professor forcefully challenged Tancredo's proposals, calling them "illiberal" and "not in accordance with the proper respect for human rights." Some students voiced their support for the controversial Congressman, and though many disagreed, they were allowed to voice their opinions in a respectful setting. Everyone who attended the event left with a fuller and richer understanding of the complexities of the immigration challenges which face the country.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Gotchya! No, seriously, student protestors pulled the fire alarm, attempted to block the speech, spat on, punched, kicked, and slashed the tires of their fellow students who organized the event. And this wasn't spontaneous violence because of an intense situation, the protestors organized on Facebook and swore to not let the event occur.

My reaction: yawn. Just another day in the life of the totalitarian left who have become so used to professors constantly validating their beliefs that the only possible reaction to an opposing viewpoint is violence.

Perhaps the most interesting part is that the protest/riot WAS planned before hand and carefully organized by a large group of students. It wasn't just a few kids who got out of hand. It was an active effort to do anything necessary to stifle speech that they didnt agree with.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Excuse me but I just proved that it's not just "a few stupid people," it's a nation wide epidemic.

Define 'nationwide epidemic'.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Define 'nationwide epidemic'.

Epidemic - rapid development: a rapid and extensive development or growth, usually of something unpleasant
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Nationwide - everywhere in nation: applying to, happening in, or found in all parts of a nation

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't see any liberals on this board condoning what these students did. What I do see is conservatives trying to condemn all liberals for the actions of a few or to overgeneralize these behaviors as being typical behaviors of liberals. It's like saying that all Christians hate homosexuals, because some extremists profess, and encourage violence against them. It's stereotyping and poor debating.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Epidemic - rapid development: a rapid and extensive development or growth, usually of something unpleasant
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Nationwide - everywhere in nation: applying to, happening in, or found in all parts of a nation

Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Thank you. There are 4140 US colleges (both private and public, including 2-year schools). You identified 4 incidents (the Columbia incident was cited twice). The incidents were isolated to California, Connecticut and New York; one state on the west coast, two in the northeast. Hardly seems 'nationwide'. Also, with but 4 incidents in very specific parts of the country, 'rapid and extensive development' also doesn't apply. With your definitions and the application of the incidents to them, a 'nationwide epidemic' would be an incorrect definition of this situation.

Link for the number of US colleges: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908742.html

 

[BWG]

What I do see is conservatives trying to condemn all liberals for the actions of a few or to overgeneralize these behaviors as being typical behaviors of liberals.

From the Denver Post article

protestors tried to block a speech by Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo.

protestors pulled a fire alarm

protestors targeting student backers of the event

Protestors interrupted the speech

protesters carried signs

Tancredo said in the email that protestors organized on the Internet social networking site Facebook.

Where does it say that the protesters had any political ties or leanings one way or the other?
Assumption? :shrug:

 

[aps]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Alright, let me say, since it is obvious I am a liberal, that I find the speaker and his Republican group disgusting. However, the group that tried to stop his speech should be arrested and charged with disturbing the peace. As well as a few assault charges it looks like.

I totally agree that they should be charged. But we're assuming that they wanted to prevent free speech when maybe it was about the speech itself that caused their anger. Getting angry at words does not equate with trying to prevent free speech. Did these people try to gag the speaker?

 

[aps]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Just so everyone's clear. The people in the article are a good example of how some stupid liberals behave. It's similar to some Christian KKK members being violent against Jews. Just some stupid Christians...doesn't say anything about all Christians. Just like this article says nothing about all liberals. What it does say, however, is that some posters (like the OP) believe that creating a straw man and making overgeneralized statements can create a valid position, when, in actuallity, they only do so for the partisan or unenlightened. The ease of showing the logical fallacy of the OP's intention requires such little brain power, that the amount cannot be measured by modern technology.

Why do you assume that the protestors are liberals? How strange.

 

[BWG]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Why do you assume that the protestors are liberals? How strange.

Were we typing at the same time?.....LOL..:lol:

 

[aps]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Were we typing at the same time?.....LOL..:lol:

I hadn't gotten to the last page of the thread, BWG. :2wave:

I just think it's bizarre that people assume that liberals were the protestors. Huh? Not every liberal feels the same about immigration. This is a very touchy subject for some foreigners who don't associate with a political party.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by aps
I totally agree that they should be charged. But we're assuming that they wanted to prevent free speech when maybe it was about the speech itself that caused their anger. Getting angry at words does not equate with trying to prevent free speech. Did these people try to gag the speaker?

Good point.

I wish I knew enough about this to respond.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Captain Courtesy:
Thank you. There are 4140 US colleges (both private and public, including 2-year schools). You identified 4 incidents (the Columbia incident was cited twice). The incidents were isolated to California, Connecticut and New York; one state on the west coast, two in the northeast. Hardly seems 'nationwide'. Also, with but 4 incidents in very specific parts of the country, 'rapid and extensive development' also doesn't apply. With your definitions and the application of the incidents to them, a 'nationwide epidemic' would be an incorrect definition of this situation.

Link for the number of US colleges: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908742.html

Way to pick apart an argument CC! My compliments to the chef. That was a text book rebuttal.

 

[AlbqOwl]

From the Denver Post article

Where does it say that the protesters had any political ties or leanings one way or the other?
Assumption? :shrug:

The mainstream media, while readily using conservative or Republican as a qualifier when a person is mentioned, rarely attaches 'liberal' to anything. That's because most of the mainstream media thinks leftwing or 'liberal' to be the normal preferred state and anything conservative to be bad or evil or misguided. This is amplified many times over by the enormously lopsided to the left situation of most university faculty these days and a left leaning political climate created on campus.

Only the blind or those who never pick up a newspaper could fail to see the regular reports of this speaker or that speaker being shouted down or uninvited or loudly protested on college campuses all over the country. And the speakers are almost invariably conservative or representing causes that many conservatives champion.

Commenting on incidents at UC Berkeley
"America's college campuses, once thought to be bastions of free speech, have become increasingly intolerant toward the practice. Visiting speakers whose views do not conform to the prevailing left-leaning political mind-set on most campuses are at particular risk of having their free speech rights infringed upon."
Mob Rule on College Campuses

By ELIANA JOHNSON - Staff Reporter of the Sun
October 5, 2006
Columbia University
"Students stormed the stage at Columbia University's Roone auditorium yesterday, knocking over chairs and tables and attacking Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the Minutemen, a group that patrols the border between America and Mexico.

Mr. Gilchrist and Marvin Stewart, another member of his group, were in the process of giving a speech at the invitation of the Columbia College Republicans. They were escorted off the stage unharmed and exited the auditorium by a back door. . . . "
Minuteman Message Board :: View topic - Minuteman Founder Attacked on College Campus

We should all think long and hard about The Supreme Court's interpretation of the First Amendment as it pertains to public college campuses over the past 80-90 years is derived in part from J.S. Mill’s essay, “On Liberty,” in which he asserted that:

“…… the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by RightatNYU:
Gotchya! No, seriously, student protestors pulled the fire alarm,

I'm going to go out on a limb here and state that teacher and I both know this probably would not have happened if they would of had a fully automatic fire alarm system (with signal verification).

Or maybe I'm just blowing smoke!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

From the Denver Post article

Where does it say that the protesters had any political ties or leanings one way or the other?
Assumption? :shrug:​

​

The Speaker was arguing against illegal immigration and was a Republican, now use your brain and the powers of deduction, would conservatives be protesting this guy? I don't think so.

​

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

I totally agree that they should be charged. But we're assuming that they wanted to prevent free speech when maybe it was about the speech itself that caused their anger. Getting angry at words does not equate with trying to prevent free speech. Did these people try to gag the speaker?

​

Because they planned it before the speech was even made:

"They declared ahead of time on facebook that they would not allow me to speak," Tancredo said in the e-mail.

DenverPost.com - Tancredo protesters turn violent

This was an organized attempt to violate the first amendment rights of free speech and free assembly and they should be charged under the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1871.​

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: So Typical of the so-called people of tolerance and peace.

Thank you. There are 4140 US colleges (both private and public, including 2-year schools). You identified 4 incidents (the Columbia incident was cited twice). The incidents were isolated to California, Connecticut and New York; one state on the west coast, two in the northeast. Hardly seems 'nationwide'. Also, with but 4 incidents in very specific parts of the country, 'rapid and extensive development' also doesn't apply. With your definitions and the application of the incidents to them, a 'nationwide epidemic' would be an incorrect definition of this situation.

Link for the number of US colleges: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908742.html

​

The "Free Speech Lesson for Liberals," article also sites a Michigan Universtity case:

"When the Michigan Board of Canvassers met to certify the measure for November’s ballot, BAMN stormed the board’s offices, jumping around and overturning tables. When Jennifer Gratz, the chief proponent of the referendum (and for you Supreme Court buffs, the plaintiff in the landmark admissions case Gratz v. Bollinger) spoke about MCRI at the University of Michigan earlier this year, BAMN was there to shout her down with chants of “fraud,” “liar” and “racist,” according to The Michigan Daily. (Ignore, at least for the sake of this article, the paradox of calling someone who seeks to end racial preferences a “racist”; instead, just focus on BAMN’s dogged efforts to not let anyone dissent against its opinions.)"

So after a cursory search on Google I found 5 examples in 4 different states including the one we're talking about now would be 6 different examples in 5 different states, considering I found all of these examples in less than a minute it leads me to believe that it is a pretty widespread phenomenon, I'm sure a detailed investigation would uncover many more instances; such as, these.

​

 

[BWG]

The Speaker was arguing against illegal immigration and was a Republican, now use your brain and the powers of deduction, would conservatives be protesting this guy? I don't think so.

When you have such totally biased, unfettered loyalty, unobstructed faith, staunch devotion to one point of view, you can only come to one conclusion.

Like I said ASSumption!!!!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

When you have such totally biased, unfettered loyalty, unobstructed faith, staunch devotion to one point of view, you can only come to one conclusion.

Like I said ASSumption!!!!

​

It's not an assumption it's called deductive reasoning.

​

 

[RightinNYC]

When you have such totally biased, unfettered loyalty, unobstructed faith, staunch devotion to one point of view, you can only come to one conclusion.

Like I said ASSumption!!!!

The people arguing that maybe the protestors weren't liberals have to be joking. Come on. I can tell you for a fact that the groups who stormed the stage at the Columbia event were the International Socialists, Students against Racism and War, The Party for Socialism & Liberation, etc etc.

I'm telling you without a doubt, without any hesitation, that the students who protested a speech sponsored by the Republicans and carried signs saying "Ignorant Racists!" were extreme leftists.

 

[BWG]

​

It's not an assumption it's called deductive reasoning.

​

How do you know that they aren't affiliated with one of the listed parties or, 'gasp', no party at all.


AMERICA FIRST PARTY, AMERICAN PARTY, AMERICAN INDEPENDENT PARTY, AMERICAN NAZI PARTY, AMERICAN REFORM PARTY, CHRISTIAN FALANGIST PARTY OF AMERICA , COMMUNIST PARTY USA, CONSTITUTION PARTY, FAMILY VALUES PARTY, FREEDOM SOCIALIST PARTY / RADICAL WOMEN, GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES (GREEN PARTY), THE GREENS/GREEN PARTY USA (G/GPUSA), INDEPENDENCE PARTY, INDEPENDENT AMERICAN PARTY, LABOR PARTY, LIBERTARIAN PARTY, LIGHT PARTY, NATURAL LAW PARTY, NEW PARTY, NEW UNION PARTY, PEACE AND FREEDOM PARTY, Prohibition Party, REFORM PARTY, The Revolution, Socialist Party USA, Socialist Action, Socialist Equality Party, Socialist Labor Party, Socialist Workers Party, U.S. Marijuana Party, U.S. Pacifist Party, Veterans Party of America, We The People Party, Workers World Party.


Maybe they just didn't like Rep. Tom Tancredo and/or his stance on immigration policies.
People don't have to have a label.
Get a little color in your life, black and white has to be like living in a closet with a 15 watt bulb......LOL...:lol:

 

[hipsterdufus]

Yup they claim they are for freedom of speech...just as long as that freedom doesn't disagree with their views.

These are the same people you see marching and screaming for peace yet are the first to turn to violence when the mood strikes them or they want to stop someone from voicing their opinions.

This quote sums it up nicely for me:
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire

Immigration is a debate that we have to have in this country - but in a civil fashion.

The kids were wrong if your story is accurate.