U Michigan, as Justin relates, is one instance of blatent distortion by the right-wing press, but I'd be interested if list members remember when Jeane Kirkpatrick, was disrupted in Syracuse, I think, during the Contra Aid yrs. Barbara Foley of INCAR/PLP, from reportage I saw, was everything that folks like Sidney Hook or Sam Hayakawa said about TWLF or SDS. A few YS DSA'ers at the same event, who dressed up like Angels of Death, I mean the Grim Reaper, and turned around when Kirkpatrick was speaking got threatened with expulsion, if memory serves. http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a25fc0578b7.htm Only relevent looking hit I got on google typing in Jeane Kirkpatrick disruption by student radicals. Another hit on sixties-list. Michael Pugliese
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 20:19:28 -0000 From: "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com> Subject: Re: Still MORE leftist attacks on free speech?
You can't believe the conservatives' version of events. I once particiapted in an anti-Jean Kirkpatrick demo at Michigan in 1988, where she was to receive an honorary degree. After much discussion, we decided NOT to be disruptive, but to politely show up at a talk sponsored by the department of poli sci with signs, let her talk, and ask tough questions in a civil way during the question session. (Very wimpy, I know.) She showed up, goggled, and fled. She didn't even give her talk. In the American Spectator, the National Review, and George F. Will's column, we learned that we had censored her with loud disruption, shouted her down, etc. It was not true; we hadn't. They lied. --jks
>From: Chuck0 <chuck at tao.ca>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Re: Still MORE leftist attacks on free speech?
>Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 15:00:45 -0500
>
>kelley wrote:
> >
> > this was posted elsewhere. curious about what really went down. kelley
> >
> > <forwarded>
> > http://frontpagemag.com/archives/racerelations/flynn03-07-01
> > .htm~Berzerk at Berkeley
>
>I still don't understand why Left students continue to shoot themselves
>in the foot with these practices. It's always used against them in this
>viscious way. It also doesn't make sense tactically since the
>conservative movement is out of gas and burning fumes.
>
Chuck0