Alon Tsin

Leftists preparing to disrupt UCLA panel

27 posts in this topic

From Little Green Footballs :

Here is their "recruitment" flier:

20070410PipesFlyerUCLA2.gif

I hope UCLA won't cancel this conference as well, as others have done in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus ca change.

Talk about a time warp. This fellow has been well coached. The language is almost word for word identical, with only a name change, to the same crap I endured at UCLA in 1973 when I shoulted that the Communists should leave my country. Clearly, they didn't listen. (Although, I distinctly still recall the shocked face of the moron handing out literature who was so surprised to hear anyone on campus disagree with his propaganda.)

These yahoos never learn.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone attend? I wasn't able to make it. How did it go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did anyone attend? I wasn't able to make it. How did it go?

I was there and it went just fine.

There was excellent security. The speakers and moderator were directed to park in an obscure location, were driven from there to the venue under armed guard, and entered through a special entrance. Everyone else was wanded, bags and purses were searched, and everyone who passed inspection got an orange security bracelet. Three armed guards and a security person in plain clothes flanked the stage and the written program had a written notice that they would eject all disrupters.

Everything went well until about three minutes into Danial Pipes' first response. Then about 20-30 protestors, most of whom looked more like leftists than Muslims, got up and started yelling "Liar! Liar!" in unison. The security people escorted them out, which was a good thing because every one of the 400 seats was full and 20-30 people waiting outside were allowed to come in and sit in the now-empty seats. A little later I heard something going on outside and a drum beating, but it wasn't loud enough to bother anyone inside. Other than that, it was calm and peaceful.

Dr. Brook made some great points, not only with the audience, but with Dr. Pipes and Dr. Sultan as well. When Dr. Sultan said the U.N. ought to protect individual rights in Muslim countries, Dr. Brook got cheers from the audience and a big smile from Dr. Sultan when he explained why we ought to kick the U.N. out of the country and send them to Venezuela. There was just too many good things said to report them all but it was videoed and will be made available soon.

While I saw several dozen familiar faces, I suspect most of the 400+ people who came were not Objectivists. The event was announced on Little Green Footballs and many commentators said they were planning to attend. Many seemed to be there because they were fans of Dr. Pipes and/or Dr. Sultan. Outside the auditorium, the UCLA campus club had a table with ARI literature and free copies of Atlas Shrugged, and many people eagerly snapped them up on the way out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little Green Footballs provided a link to a video of the disruption, for those who are interested.

Video

It looks like a full sized crowd on hand, as Betsy points out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A complete video of the event has been posted on the Registered Users page on the ARI web site.

I encourage EVERYONE to watch the full 2 hours at the ARI web site.

theDML2112

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everything went well until about three minutes into Danial Pipes' first response. Then about 20-30 protestors, most of whom looked more like leftists than Muslims, got up and started yelling "Liar! Liar!" in unison. The security people escorted them out, which was a good thing because every one of the 400 seats was full and 20-30 people waiting outside were allowed to come in and sit in the now-empty seats. A little later I heard something going on outside and a drum beating, but it wasn't loud enough to bother anyone inside. Other than that, it was calm and peaceful.

What do leftists hope to achieve by such disruption? Do they believe that someone in the audience will think "Wow, if that protestor plays a drum, Dr. Pipes must be lying"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do leftists hope to achieve by such disruption? Do they believe that someone in the audience will think "Wow, if that protestor plays a drum, Dr. Pipes must be lying"?

I doubt if they've thought about it even that much. They don't ever try to use rational arguments; shouting and beind disruptive is all they know how to do instead.

I think they just hope to use force to intimidate people into not speaking out. They've been doing this sort of thing for years: if somebody is saying something they disagree with, they'll respond with threats, violence, and if that doesn't work, just start shouting.

Having grown up when the "new left" was at its peak in the late 1960's, they have always reminded me of spoiled children. Maybe it's no more than that: they're just throwing tantrums because they aren't getting their way. They really don't like it when other people ignore them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the one poster say, "Don't Support Free Speech"??!!? :)

At least it might make sense, that he would be displaying that sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just returned from George Mason University and John Lewis' talk. Yes, there were protesters there, and they acted somewhat like the ones in the video, except, unfortunately, the losers never left.

Dr. Lewis gave an excellent presentation titled, "No Substitute for Victory: The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism". You may read about it here: http://gmuobjectivistclub.blogspot.com/ I sat near a GMU employee who was video taping everything. I will try to post any links to videos I find.

The protesters were a tiresome lot of left-over, hippie-wanna-bes and (apparent) Moslems. When Dr. Lewis approached the podium, they all stood up with their backs to him. All I could think of was, "They have a choice to use their minds or their bodies, and which do they choose? They obviously have less respect for their own minds than they do for their backsides." They held up 8 1/2" x 11" "signs", (no, I am not making this up), with all sorts of ridiculous slogans, such as "Islam = Peace", (no doubt, they got that one from George Bush), and several criticizing Bush, as if Dr. Lewis would object to that! They were rude in general, talking in normal voices during the lecture. Several of them made comments throughout the lecture. The comments utterly lacked wit, and were totally ignorant of Dr. Lewis' true beliefs. What really killed me, was that they scoffed, grunted, and made derogatory comments when Dr. Lewis promoted individual rights. This did not seem to be mistaken, but actually _denigrating_ individual rights! The one thing I did find funny, is that if some avowed leftist had criticized Bush as Dr. Lewis did, they would have cheered themselves hoarse; when he did, they merely scoffed.

For any other campus club, I have several suggestions to minimize the disruptions.

1. Announce that if anyone leaves the room, he/she will not be readmitted.

2. Anyone standing in front of another guest will be immediately removed.

3. Have a moderator hold the microphone for questioners. DO NOT let them hold it themselves. All you get is another platform, rather than a question.

GMU had plenty of security; they just did very little to alleviate the pests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just returned from George Mason University and John Lewis' talk. Yes, there were protesters there, and they acted somewhat like the ones in the video, except, unfortunately, the losers never left.

Dr. Lewis gave an excellent presentation titled, "No Substitute for Victory: The Defeat of Islamic Totalitarianism". You may read about it here: http://gmuobjectivistclub.blogspot.com/ I sat near a GMU employee who was video taping everything. I will try to post any links to videos I find.

The protesters were a tiresome lot of left-over, hippie-wanna-bes and (apparent) Moslems. When Dr. Lewis approached the podium, they all stood up with their backs to him. All I could think of was, "They have a choice to use their minds or their bodies, and which do they choose? They obviously have less respect for their own minds than they do for their backsides." They held up 8 1/2" x 11" "signs", (no, I am not making this up), with all sorts of ridiculous slogans, such as "Islam = Peace", (no doubt, they got that one from George Bush), and several criticizing Bush, as if Dr. Lewis would object to that! They were rude in general, talking in normal voices during the lecture. Several of them made comments throughout the lecture. The comments utterly lacked wit, and were totally ignorant of Dr. Lewis' true beliefs. What really killed me, was that they scoffed, grunted, and made derogatory comments when Dr. Lewis promoted individual rights. This did not seem to be mistaken, but actually _denigrating_ individual rights! The one thing I did find funny, is that if some avowed leftist had criticized Bush as Dr. Lewis did, they would have cheered themselves hoarse; when he did, they merely scoffed.

For any other campus club, I have several suggestions to minimize the disruptions.

1. Announce that if anyone leaves the room, he/she will not be readmitted.

2. Anyone standing in front of another guest will be immediately removed.

3. Have a moderator hold the microphone for questioners. DO NOT let them hold it themselves. All you get is another platform, rather than a question.

GMU had plenty of security; they just did very little to alleviate the pests.

I attended the talk at GMU -- I sat in the second row, right behind some of the College Republicans and Nick Provenzo.

I was stunned by how much irrationality was displayed by the disruptive students. I couldn't believe how much they were allowed to get away with.

Some of the more disruptive Islamists near the front were upset that I, and other supporters of Dr. Lewis, stood and cheered key points of his speech. In desperation, one stood up violently and hysterically accused me of "THREATENING" him when I told him, seated right behind me, to lower his voice (I had also said I would ask security to remove him). I responded that I had done no such thing. I stated my position to the audience and to the "security" when they arrived on the scene. Knowing they couldn't take me out on such a flimsy lie, a "security officer" told me, in a very polite tone, that he would like to "talk" to me near the questioners beside the stage.

I asked him why; he said he would just like to "talk." I saw the move coming but decided not to make a fuss. After I stood up and walked toward the question area, he then asked me to come outside with him. I asked him why, and he said one of the university officials had asked them to escort me out. I didn't even bother to ask why...the official in question was very likely one fatuous twerp who had introduced himself as the "Director of Student Life with regard to Multicultural Affairs" or something like that. I suspect he was working hand-in-hand with the disrupters.

Outside, I took up my case with the "officers." One of them - not the one who'd escorted me out - had the gall to lie outright to my face that he'd heard me threaten to "break [the Islamist's] neck." Since he was a law-enforcement officer, I gave him the benefit of the doubt and reiterated my innocence several times in the most polite tone I could muster under the circumstances. He then told me to leave. Suspecting they were looking for something to hang me with, I left the scene.

If this is what is considered a successful talk, then I shudder to think what the failed ones are like. The atmosphere was so charged I thought I was in the very early stages of a violent riot.

Dr. Lewis was under tremendous pressure, and it is my view that the talk should NOT have been conducted under those conditions. The disrupters interrupted throughout the talk, and Dr. Lewis broke the tenor of his speech several times to respond to the noises of these barbarians. They were disrespectful in the worst ways, and the two questioners I heard before I left (one of whom was my accuser) were downright insulting. I did not, and do not, believe their questions deserved responses. I don't mean to come down on Dr. Lewis, whom I admire very much, but he may have granted the "dissenters" too much.

I found the affair taxing, but I did see a few rational students face down one or two of the disrupters, in order to hear the points being made by Dr. Lewis. If those rational few were reached, perhaps the evening was a success after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Outside, I took up my case with the "officers." One of them - not the one who'd escorted me out - had the gall to lie outright to my face that he'd heard me threaten to "break [the Islamist's] neck."

That an American cop would be so sympathetic to those vermin that he would manufacture a lie (not that there's *any* excuse for that, period), is the most hair raising thing of all.

Is there any university anywhere that isn't so much under the thumb of the multiculturists that an Objectivist group can specify the conditions, e.g. ejection of disruptive individuals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought as well: Were these "officers" employed by the university? Did they have uniforms explicitly showing that affiliation? It is conceivable that the Muslims could have enough external support (i.e. the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia) that they could hire their own thugs in uniforms posing as "security". I suspect though that it's simply the same sort of worthless idiots that let Cho prepare unimpeded for 2 hours after his initial shootings at VA Tech, onto an unprepared campus they were supposed to protect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there any university anywhere that isn't so much under the thumb of the multiculturists that an Objectivist group can specify the conditions, e.g. ejection of disruptive individuals?

ARI and the UCLA club did exactly that, announced in the written program and before the event that disrupters would be ejected, and that is what happened. The disturbance lasted 3 minutes and the audience cheered as the protesters were thrown out.

Of course, that is not what happened previously at UCLA when they cancelled an ARI event for "security" reasons but allowed the protesters to demonstrate for hours. ARI fought back by going public, writing op-eds, going on talk radio, and eventually getting everything they wanted from UCLA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another thought as well: Were these "officers" employed by the university? Did they have uniforms explicitly showing that affiliation? It is conceivable that the Muslims could have enough external support (i.e. the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia) that they could hire their own thugs in uniforms posing as "security". I suspect though that it's simply the same sort of worthless idiots that let Cho prepare unimpeded for 2 hours after his initial shootings at VA Tech, onto an unprepared campus they were supposed to protect.

These men wore uniforms, which is why I thought justice would be done, or at least be seen to be done.

No such hope. I think they were campus policemen though, but they had guns and wore black, so I could be wrong. My suspicion is that they were campus policemen also sympathetic to multiculturalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ARI and the UCLA club did exactly that, announced in the written program and before the event that disrupters would be ejected, and that is what happened. The disturbance lasted 3 minutes and the audience cheered as the protesters were thrown out.

Excellent. I don't understand then why ARI doesn't do this for every event, anywhere. Hopefully Mercury will let ARI know what happened to him personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ARI and the UCLA club did exactly that, announced in the written program and before the event that disrupters would be ejected, and that is what happened. The disturbance lasted 3 minutes and the audience cheered as the protesters were thrown out.

Excellent. I don't understand then why ARI doesn't do this for every event, anywhere. Hopefully Mercury will let ARI know what happened to him personally.

The GMU event wasn't sponsored by the ARI, but I have narrated my experience to Nick Provenzo who organized the talk.

He apologized, saying they will look into the matter, but I don't expect much to come from it. If the lying security-officer were willing to testify, it would be my word against his and the Islamist's. A few people seated around me may be willing to testify on my behalf, but, to be effective, they would need the courage of their convictions.

Nevertheless, rest assured: justice will be mine. This is only the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did the one poster say, "Don't Support Free Speech"??!!? :)

At least it might make sense, that he would be displaying that sentiment.

The poster said "Don't Support Hate Speech" - which is ridiculous.

I would like to know more about the GMU/Dr. Lewis event...some one who was present want to start a thread on it??

theDML2112

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to know more about the GMU/Dr. Lewis event...some one who was present want to start a thread on it??

theDML2112

Take a look at the link I posted. Nick Provenzo added a good post today.

The most painful part of it all was the 'question' period. The first woman went on and on and on without asking anything. They really needed someone to say and enforce the Ford Hall Forum adage, "Remember, you are the questioner. The speaker is on the platform." One of the dolts accused Dr. Lewis of stating people have, "God given rights." I think he was so taken aback that someone would say that he said that, that he did not answer as forcefully as he normally would have. The most absurd was the guy Provenzo mentions. The man started out well, then went on to accuse Dr. Lewis of being 'angry', while his own pitch, volume, and seething crescendoed over the course of about a minute or two, (which seemed like several hours).

I could write more, but instead, I will try to find more links, including, I hope, video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did the one poster say, "Don't Support Free Speech"??!!? :)

At least it might make sense, that he would be displaying that sentiment.

The poster said "Don't Support Hate Speech" - which is ridiculous.

I would like to know more about the GMU/Dr. Lewis event...some one who was present want to start a thread on it??

theDML2112

There's a summary post on Rule of Reason, if you're interested. Check out the comments also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites