Gothamist: Protesters Explain Last Week's Protest

Jeff

Wed, 11 Oct 2006 11:25:44 -0500

I think we need to keep in mind that most of the protesters are barely out of childhood. Therefore, most of them haven't matured into adults and clearly do not know how to behave at public events. Like my 7 year-old son, the protesters think stomping their feet and covering their ears is the way to get want they want. And when that doesn't work they cry and claim victimhood. I'm not saying their immaturity excuses their behavior---far from it, they need to be punished so that they learn from their mistakes. If they're not punished then many of them will be forever stuck in adolescence.

dude

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 23:51:15 -0500

Everyone I know who went to Columbia as an undergrad was either dumb as shit and rich or just a douche-bag (and possibly rich).

AC

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:04:34 -0500

Typical left wing college dumbasses. They take a couple of classes and all of a sudden they are smarter than everyone else and get to determine who has free speech and who doesn't. They really proved what racists the minutemen are by screaming racial slurs at the black minuteman who was speaking. I hope they all get expelled from Columbia but that won't happen.

hacksaw jimmy duggan

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:24:29 -0500

Tough guy! Iron sheik will krush you. Bill O'rly.

nola

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:02:58 -0500

The funny thing about knuckleheads like ZB, Damiano and people rushing the stage is that they decry people like Bill O'Reilly for being "bullies" but they covet that kind of power for themselves. Since nobody will ever put losers like them on television they are reduced to childish stunts to get some attention. Poor, neglected children.

Sam

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:50:06 -0500

'"Freedom of speech" = your right to say whatever you want without fear of being shut down or persecution from STATE ENTITIES for the content of your views.' You're an IDIOT. We already covered the facts, he has the right to say what he wants, without yelling "fire" in a movie theatre. That's the interpretation-you don't have the right to charge forward and try to shout him down-you have the right to leave. Your O'Reilly analogy was moronic-because we can all turn hin off!

ZB

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:40:43 -0500

The most amazing thing to me is how much this has illustrated how little anyone understands the First Amendment--Bloomberg and Bollinger included. "Freedom of speech" = your right to say whatever you want without fear of being shut down or persecution from STATE ENTITIES for the content of your views. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with having your views heard. There is no freedom to be heard. Gilchrist could continued speaking all he wanted. He just wasn't going to get heard. Is that impolite? Yes. Is it a free speech violation? No. If you disgree with someone's views you have every right to try and interrupt them. Is that the best way for a civil discourse? Of course not. But it's not a constitutional principle that every view is granted the space to be heard. Shouting (or storming a stage or pulling out a banner) while someone else is speaking is not an impingement on their constitution rights to free speech. If that were the case, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and just about every other blowhard talk show host would be guilty of this crime on a daily basis whenever they choose to shout down whoever they are speaking with when they don't agree with the content of their guest's views.

GT

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:52:36 -0500

So the Minutemen are practicing violence, and getting away with it. Ah... the real world.

pedestrian

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:36:18 -0500

So a coalition of socialists and open-borders advocates loyal to foreign countries is justifying violence? Ah, college.

he has to say it

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:10:26 -0500

Maybe it is because Bollinger is about as sincere as a White House press briefing?

anomalous

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 12:02:34 -0500

I wonder the same thing "my way..." is wondering, what is the deal between Bloomberg and Bollinger? PrezBo came out clearly for free speech yet the mayor keeps (almost nastily) harping on how Columbia has to allow free speech.

Irritated

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:44:09 -0500

Bottom line--they were invited to speak. If you don't want to listen, don't go. If you want to protest them being there, protest. Don't rush onto the stage and try to shout them down like a bunch of third-graders at a food fight. This is not free speech -- it's just embarrassing.

toby

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:39:52 -0500

what a bunch of idiots. "no one is illegal" ??? these kids go to columbia?? schools are eager to take anyone's money these days huh?

my way or highway

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:36:27 -0500

Is there a feud between bloomberg and bollinger? Per NY1, they just had a sit down and the mayor is still dissing him. or should I say berate him with his he needs to allow free speech AKA Mr. mayor, do as I say, not as I do.

Matt

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:29:15 -0500

Leftists deflecting genuine questions and concerns and then playing the victim card? That's so tired.

one party one state

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:28:22 -0500

typical liberal college fascism

Damiano

Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:25:57 -0500

I'm not the only one who thinks that stage rushes are a pretty celebrated protest technique that generally do not result in a speech ending, am I? Usually the protesters rush the stage, make a nuisance get escorted out by security and everything continues as it was. I don't think we can blame the protesters for not expecting there to be a violent reaction, and the blame for the speech ending clearly falls on the Minutemen and their penchant for kicking people in the head.