Dennis Prager writes about this incident and his experiences speaking on college campuses.

Quote :

"This opposition took the form of opposing funding of speakers invited to campus; writing articles in campus newspapers attacking the speakers, the Awareness Week and the term 'Islamo-Fascism' as essentially racist; and in some cases disrupting the speech. I experienced the first two forms of leftist opposition; David Horowitz experienced the third as well. He was invited to speak at Emory University, but leftist students packed the hall and shouted him down. Emory officials did nothing to stop the harassment and the suppression of speech, and Horowitz was unable to deliver his talk. It is considerably more difficult to get conservative speakers invited to most American universities -- or for them to be able to speak without being harassed -- than it is for a Holocaust-denying, genocide-advocating leader, such as Iran's Ahmadinejad at Columbia University, to deliver a speech at an American university. In my case, about a quarter of the 300 students who came to my talk at UCSB were leftists opposed to my coming. But they allowed me to deliver my remarks without once trying to shout me down. There were, I believe, three reasons for this. One is that UCSB has a relatively calm political climate. Second, there was a serious police presence and it was clear that disrupters would be removed, if not arrested. Third, students told me afterward that I disarmed those who came to oppose me. Contrary to the demonized figure they had assumed I am -- in one UCSB student newspaper column, I was compared to a Ku Klux Klanner for speaking on Islamo-Fascism --they saw a decent man, a sometimes funny guy, and heard a low-keyed, intellectual speech that contained not one word of gratuitous hatred. It is worth mentioning that following my lecture, the student who wrote the column comparing me to a Ku Klux Klanner came over to me and said he was writing a column of apology to me and asked to be photographed with me. This is not surprising. Students at most universities are almost brainwashed into being leftist -- and the way they are taught to disagree with their political opponents is by using ad hominem attacks. Conservatives are described over and over as mean-spirited, war-loving, greedy, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, homophobic, sexist, intolerant and oblivious to human suffering. Such ad hominem labels are the left's primary rhetorical weapons. So when leftist students are actually confronted with even one articulate conservative, many enter a world of cognitive dissonance. That is one reason why universities rarely invite conservatives to speak: they might change some students' minds."

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23132

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NqMiE-w65Uo

What about Horowitz's free speech? Weren't his rights violated? Horowitz was an invited speaker; shouldn't he have been allowed to finish his presentation? The answer is self-evident.

10/30/2007 10:52:41 PM

Quote :

"So when leftist students are actually confronted with even one articulate conservative, many enter a state of speechless shock."

10/30/2007 10:58:04 PM

Quote :

"Students at most universities are almost brainwashed into being leftist -- and the way they are taught to disagree with their political opponents is by using ad hominem attacks. Conservatives are described over and over as mean-spirited, war-loving, greedy, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, homophobic, sexist, intolerant and oblivious to human suffering."

Did I miss out on Indoctrination 101?

Please give examples of ad hominem being taught/encouraged in a university classroom.

And where are these views of conservatives being taught? I've been through the Appalachian (omg liberal) and NCSU history departments, and never saw this being taught. Odd. I've seen more liberal professors than conservative, but only a "brainwashed" right winger would describe them as quoted.

10/30/2007 11:26:51 PM

^
University of Delaware Requires Students to Undergo Ideological Reeducation

Quote :

"NEWARK, Del., October 30, 2007—The University of Delaware subjects students in its residence halls to a shocking program of ideological reeducation that is referred to in the university’s own materials as a 'treatment' for students’ incorrect attitudes and beliefs. The Orwellian program requires the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware’s residence halls to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students’ rights to freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech."

Quote :

"The university’s views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to 'sustainability' door decorations. Students living in the university’s eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a 'diversity facilitation training' session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that '[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality' [emphasis added]. The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as 'When did you discover your sexual identity?' Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA’s 'worst' one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having 'diversity shoved down her throat' [emphasis added]. According to the program’s materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university’s residence halls to achieve certain 'competencies' that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of 'citizenship.' These competencies include: 'Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society,' 'Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression,' and 'Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality' [emphasis added]. At various points in the program, students are also pressured or even required to take actions that outwardly indicate their agreement with the university’s ideology, regardless of their personal beliefs. Such actions include displaying specific door decorations, committing to reduce their ecological footprint by at least 20%, taking action by advocating for an 'oppressed' social group, and taking action by advocating for a 'sustainable world' [emphasis added]. In the Office of Residence Life’s internal materials, these programs are described using the harrowing language of ideological reeducation. In documents relating to the assessment of student learning, for example, the residence hall lesson plans are referred to as 'treatments' [emphasis added]."

http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/8555.html?PHPSESSID=af6af4ccc1afba1ea0e3605fef3c55b0

There's a whole organization dedicated to defense against this kind of crap. Here's their Web site that lists scores of these types of incidents--knock yourself out.

http://www.thefire.org/

PS: Please withhold your opinion of FIRE--I don't care one way or the other. Unless you intend to dispute that these incidents actually happened, your thoughts on the source are irrelevant. FYI.

10/30/2007 11:45:24 PM

hooksaw, you are so close to making a point...

I'm interested in reading these "articulate" conservative pieces by Mr. Horowtiz and others (Prager) that leave many "leftist" students in a "state of speechless shock."

Could you post some of those amazing speeches/articles/essays/etc...?

I'm more interested in that than anything...

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 12:01 AM. Reason : ?]

10/31/2007 12:00:12 AM

If you are wanting us to shed a tear over David Horowitz, than you've probably come to the wrong place. Horowitz has a long history of thinly veiled racism and if you consider him an articulate "conservative" it only damages your cause.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 12:06 AM. Reason : /]

10/31/2007 12:04:48 AM

^^


Spend a weekend with this book--instead of drinking--I recommend both.

^^ and ^ Your failure to comprehend a simple point hurts your cause: Whether Horowitz or any conservative is articulate is not the point--as invited speakers, they should be allowed to speak. Otherwise, their free speech rights have been violated. Isn't that so?

And Horowitz is not a racist--he's actually a reformed leftist commie. In any event, what about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? His racism is not "thinly veiled" or veiled at all--yet he was allowed to speak at the prestigious Columbia. Did you object to that appearance?

10/31/2007 12:21:10 AM

The video posted from Fox News is crap.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7104305390560861531&q=horowitz+emory+speech&total=5&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

those kids really were jerks though. They could have used a good dose of STFU.

Quote :

"- or for them to be able to speak without being harassed -- than it is for a Holocaust-denying, genocide-advocating leader, such as Iran's Ahmadinejad at Columbia University, to deliver a speech at an American university."

But, people who claim Ahmedinjab wasn't harassed are delusional. The guy was harassed at every turn, from the bitter protests before his speech to his much less than pleasant introduction, to "boos" throughout his speech. This is the same persecution complex that comes from the right that is one of the tenets of their very well tuned propaganda machines.

Not to mention that Ahmedinjab, the guy who our gov. talks about nuking, and who we are told to fear nukes from, is not anywhere near the same league as horowitz, in terms of people worth listening to. Horowitz is in the same class as Michael Moore, who'd probably get similar treatment to Horowitz at a conservative university.

10/31/2007 1:11:25 AM

Quote :

"a conservative university"

Haven't you been paying attention to this entire thread?!?!? These places don't exist because liberals have taken over the education system. It's just lucky for us conservatives that we can indoctrinate our children at a young age and teach them to never, ever open their fucking minds for any reason whatsoever. That's what conservative means - sticking to traditional standards, whether they're right or wrong.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 1:15 AM. Reason : sleepy]

10/31/2007 1:15:09 AM

^ Stupid troll. You've addressed nothing and revealed much.

10/31/2007 1:33:50 AM

^ You're posts would be as lame as mine too if you were hampered by the need for rational thought.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 1:48 AM. Reason : ]

10/31/2007 1:47:51 AM

Most dangerous Academics, eh?

10/31/2007 1:48:23 AM

^^ Paradox duly noted and promptly disregarded. My thought is quite rational--you just happen to disagree with it.

^ Yes, now you have it--that's the subtitle.

10/31/2007 1:53:07 AM

Quote :

"Paradox duly noted and promptly disregarded"

Wow, an original idea coming from hooksaw. Wait...

10/31/2007 2:07:39 AM

Quote :

"^ Paradox duly noted and promptly disregarded."

Just STFU, shithead troll.

10/31/2007 2:09:35 AM

You know, at first this hooksaw topic had the potential to actually be worth some intelligent discussion...

Hooray for trolling and the resultant anti-trolling! The perfect counter-maneuver to the formation of a decent topic.

10/31/2007 2:36:39 AM

Quote :

"What about Horowitz's free speech? Weren't his rights violated? Horowitz was an invited speaker; shouldn't he have been allowed to finish his presentation? The answer is self-evident."

When a topic gets started off like this, how can you place blame on anyone for trolling? Of course the answer is self-evident. This guy certainly should have been allowed to speak. Anyone who denies that is going against the 1st Amendment. But when you post something with such a one-sided commentary, don't be surprised when things go downhill quickly. hooksaw once again posted an interesting article that had the potential to be a good topic, but due to his copy and paste method it left a clear lack of direction in the thread. Without any leadership and yet another "read my mind" commentary (or lack thereof) the thread was doomed from the start. I have no idea what his original intent was for posting this article because he failed to articulate what his actual point was.

10/31/2007 2:46:30 AM

^I think the general idea was to make leftists feel bad about themselves for being leftists... or for everyone entering the topic to just shout at what assholes the leftists are.

My opinion on the topic, though... his 1st Amendment rights actually were NOT being violated, as it was not the government that was denying him the right to speak. They university has the right to end his speech if they so please, they're the ones that invited him and (presumably) would be the ones paying for him to get there, and the only visible repercussions of this action being that they be portrayed as unethical by the media/populace.

Sure, Ahmenejad [or however he spells it] was allowed to speak at a university... why him and not Horowitz? Simple, publicity for the university. A "stunt" like letting Horowitz speak isn't going to get them anywhere, and not many people will react if they cancel it.

Hypothetically, you invite someone to speak at your [place]. They mail you back saying that they've planned a speech on how fulfilling it is to kill small children. Are you really going to let them speak? Unless you just wanted to shock the hell out of your audience, would you not cancel their invitation?

10/31/2007 2:55:20 AM

^^^ The topic stands on its merits. Did you offer anything about it? No, you graced us with the all-too familiar critique of the thread's quality while simultaneously failing to address the actual topic and maintaining an I'm-above-it-all air. GG.

^^ Let me break my points down for you, admitted troll:

Quote :

"[1] What about Horowitz's free speech? [2] Weren't his rights violated? [3] Horowitz was an invited speaker; shouldn't he have been allowed to finish his presentation? The answer is self-evident."

Do not presume to lecture me about what constitutes a proper post. I mean, it's too bad that I've owned you numerous times tonight--but you'll get over it.

Quote :

"This guy certainly should have been allowed to speak."

Well, the user who posted right after you doesn't think so and so do a hell of a lot more like him. There's your debate, dumbass. I can't help what you can't comprehend--try harder.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 3:05 AM. Reason : .]

10/31/2007 2:55:58 AM

^Might want to edit that one more time with a single "^"

Quote :

"What about Horowitz's free speech? Weren't his rights violated? Horowitz was an invited speaker; shouldn't he have been allowed to finish his presentation? The answer is self-evident."

To summarize my previous post... The answer to all of these is a self-evident and resounding NO

...except that last part of the questions... "should" is an ambiguous term. From a public-relations standpoint, they should indeed have let him finish. From the standpoint of the Constitution, they didn't really need to.


Edit: Strike all that stuff that was here. Misunderstood who you were talking to, hooksaw.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 3:14 AM. Reason : .]

10/31/2007 2:59:44 AM

^^ How can you possibly post that commentary knowing full well that 99% of people will agree that he should have been allowed to speak? Those are all loaded questions. And on top of that, you didn't even post what your thoughts are. Your posts are full of empty rhetoric and offer nothing of substance to any discussion. Will you please elaborate for me what your feelings are for this particular piece, because apparently there is not one person who is smart enough to comprehend the message you are trying to relay to us.

10/31/2007 3:09:45 AM

^ "99%"? Prove it.

10/31/2007 3:13:14 AM

You are a fucking idiot. GG

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 3:15 AM. Reason : ]

10/31/2007 3:14:45 AM

Provided that 99% of the American people don't realize the actual intent of the Constitution, he's right. Provided that more than 1% of the US has minimal political education, he's wrong.

Oh, and hooksaw, it actually would help you to say which side you support rather than just relaying articles to TSB in the hopes that you will spark some sort of discussion that doesn't degenerate into trollfights.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 3:16 AM. Reason : .]

10/31/2007 3:15:08 AM

^^ Owned again. You really should just shut the fuck up--for the good of all.

10/31/2007 3:16:10 AM

Yes, you have owned me multiple times tonight by refusing to answer every single one of my call-outs. I've asked you to debate me at least 10 different times to no avail. You're nothing but some dipshit pussy who can't even defend the threads you create. You post inane bullshit about whatever insignificant issue is currently making your vagina bleed. You have no spine, no heart, and furthermore, you're a disgrace to America for being so blind and stupid. If you really loved your country as much as you say you do, you'd stand up for what you believe in instead of the retarded cop-outs you post posing as coherent thoughts. You dumb down the debate just by participating. Any thought you post on here is copy and pasted from someone who is more capable of defending their point of view but must be equally as retarded for writing anything you would agree with. That's why you use smileys so often... pressing a button is the only thing you're feeble mind is capable of. You're pathetic. STFU. GTFO. GG.

10/31/2007 3:27:10 AM

^I predict hooksaw to say something of the general nature of "STFU and quit trolling on my topics. And I don't have a vagina to bleed from, so you fail."

And I anticipate that you will respond with a somewhat more articulate version of that.

10/31/2007 3:29:59 AM

If he's not shamed into feeling like a bitch after that, I'm just gonna stop posting.

10/31/2007 3:31:53 AM

^^

1. Fuck you, motherfucker.

2. I can list the threads that I owned you in for all to see if necessary.

3.

10/31/2007 3:32:53 AM

^^Aww, then I won't be able to hang around and criticize the both of you for being wrong in your own special ways...

Oh, and if you're wondering why you're wrong IMStoned, it's because you so adamantly refuse to try looking at the issue from the viewpoint opposite your own, and seeing how it's rationalized. Granted, hooksaw's not doing this either, but if you really want to look like the more intelligent one, try it out.

Edit:
^This is why your threads always seem to fail. Images do not belong in TSB unless they are relevant to the issue being discussed in the topic. And they're annoying. 'Night, failures.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 3:36 AM. Reason : .]

10/31/2007 3:35:07 AM

If he ever had a thought, I'd certainly give it a try. Unfortunately, my opinion on troll dolls is pretty set in stone.



[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 3:38 AM. Reason : ]

10/31/2007 3:36:07 AM

^

10/31/2007 3:40:40 AM

Quote :

"What about Horowitz's free speech?"

What about his free speech? His free speech was in no way violated.

Quote :

"Weren't his rights violated?"

No.

Quote :

"Horowitz was an invited speaker; shouldn't he have been allowed to finish his presentation?"

No, not if those who invited him decide so. Horowitz was speaking at their pleasure.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 6:46 AM. Reason : ]

10/31/2007 6:46:02 AM

Classic hooksaw abortion of a thread. Copy and paste original post, not a single post from hooksaw actually debating the topic. The only people who even attempt to post serious responses are told to STFU.

This is all pretty ironic given the topic of the thread.

Quote :

"I think the general idea was to make leftists feel bad about themselves for being leftists... or for everyone entering the topic to just shout at what assholes the leftists are."

10/31/2007 7:54:19 AM

Quote :

" David Horowitz was invited to speak at Emory University, but leftist students packed the hall and shouted him down. Emory officials did nothing to stop the harassment and the suppression of speech, and Horowitz was unable to deliver his talk. "Horowitz was an invited speaker; shouldn't he have been allowed to finish his presentation?" No, not if those who invited him decide so. Horowitz was speaking at their pleasure. "

So perhaps Emory officials invited Horowitz to speak with the goal to have him shouted down without mercy? Was Horowitz paid for this speech? I would have a clause in my contract that would included a financial penalty paid to me if school officials cannot control the room.

10/31/2007 9:25:09 AM

OMG THE LIBERAL ZIONIST CONSPIRACY :roll:

10/31/2007 9:26:17 AM

ok, i'm saying it

stop with the posting of troll pictures

despite the fact that you're a raving loony this is supposed to not be "chit chat"

while I'm all for the occasionally fuck you picture or statement this systematic douchebaggery should not be tolerated

and...

i'm certain that the mod will tend to agree

10/31/2007 9:39:38 AM

Quote :

"[1] What about Horowitz's free speech? [2] Weren't his rights violated?"

Uh, no? Using that rationale, Limbaugh violates peoples' free speech on a daily basis when he cuts their mics.

And I now remember who this guy is. The famed author of Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left and The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America.What kind of reception does he expect to receive when he speaks at institutions he's so unfairly characterized?


So the worst example of indoctrination is a school going overboard in resistance hall diversity sessions?

And diversity is a "leftist" value?

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 11:38 AM. Reason : .]

10/31/2007 11:37:50 AM

Recommended reading (all of it) for University of Delaware Residence Life's Whole New World Training:

Confessions of Donna
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/Confessions_of_Donna.doc

Culture of White Supremacy
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/Culture_of_White_Supremacy.pdf

Detour Spotting for White Anti-Rascists
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/Detour_Spotting_for_White_Anti_Racists.pdf

Daily Effects of White Privilege
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/Peggy_McIntosh.rtf

White Racial Identity
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/students/White_Racial_Identity.doc

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 11:59 AM. Reason : ]

10/31/2007 11:58:48 AM

Quote :

"The following articles were recommended as suggested readings by Dr. Shakti Butler during the training she provided for staff and Whole New World facilitators during her training sessions on August 15 and 16, 2007."

is what ^ really is

10/31/2007 12:06:08 PM

hahah. I bet I can guess how many of the RA's actually read one of them.

10/31/2007 12:10:52 PM

So, I'll try and pull this thing back on track. What are we to think of the students who wouldn't let Horowitz speak? Are these people to be held up as bastions of "tolerance" and respectors of "diversity?" Or, should point them out to be what they really are: absolutely every bit as bigoted and closed-minded as they claim their opponents are?

10/31/2007 5:20:50 PM

It doesn't matter whether or not Horowitz's audience was full of douches.

Horowitz has no legal right to free speech that compels the audience to sit politely and listen.

[Edited on October 31, 2007 at 5:47 PM. Reason : ]

10/31/2007 5:46:54 PM

don't disagree with you.

10/31/2007 5:56:45 PM

Quote :

"Neo-Conservatives are described over and over as mean-spirited, war-loving, greedy, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, homophobic, sexist, intolerant and oblivious to human suffering."

10/31/2007 6:20:56 PM

Quote :

"Second, there was a serious police presence and it was clear that disrupters would be removed, if not arrested."

Figures. Nothing like armed thugs for ensuring open and honest debate.

10/31/2007 7:23:02 PM

Quote :

"^^ and ^ Your failure to comprehend a simple point hurts your cause: Whether Horowitz or any conservative is articulate is not the point--as invited speakers, they should be allowed to speak. Otherwise, their free speech rights have been violated. Isn't that so? And Horowitz is not a racist--he's actually a reformed leftist commie. In any event, what about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? His racism is not "thinly veiled" or veiled at all--yet he was allowed to speak at the prestigious Columbia. Did you object to that appearance?"

No, you're not getting my point. All your threads are about how liberals suck. I want you to post something persuasive about your world view. Post about what makes you right and good, not what makes liberals wrong and bad. You gotta sprinkle something meaningful into the liberals suck, liberals suck, liberals suck bit.

In response to your topic:

David Horowitz has engaged in some pretty incendiary stunts. He's the one who has presented himself as this offensive jerk...he shouldn't be surprised when he gets treated like one.

Furthermore, if Horowitz has the right to free speech in this instance, then the students have the right to assemble and protest by shouting his ass down.

And don't even start with that Ahmadinejad bullshit...the university and the people who went to hear him speak were not sympathetic to him. I mean, he was introduced as a "petty and cruel dictator." But Ahmadinejad is the president of a country in a volatile region of the world that is very much relevant to us at this time. You're goddamn right people are in interested in hearing what he has to say. Horowitz just doesn't matter like that.

And as far as conservative speakers having a hard time getting to speak at college campuses, I'd have to disagree. I mean, just from the article you posted, Horowitz said that he was able to speak at UCSB with little incident. And ultra-conservative Ahmadinejad was able to speak at Columbia, as well. So...yeah...

10/31/2007 7:41:03 PM

Quote :

"It doesn't matter whether or not Horowitz's audience was full of douches. Horowitz has no legal right to free speech that compels the audience to sit politely and listen."

A Tanzarian

So, any public event can be disrupted by idiots? Is that really what you're saying? Is that really what you want?

11/5/2007 6:09:17 AM

Emory University is a private institution. As such, they're free to allow whoever they like to attend their functions, and they're free to run their auditorium as they see fit.

When Horowitz owns or rents his own auditorium, then he can run his speeches as he would like. In the meantime, Horowitz has no legal right to free speech that compels the audience to sit politely and listen.

11/5/2007 7:36:04 AM

being brainwashed is so much better than being a nazi.

AM I RITE!

11/5/2007 8:30:12 AM