December 23, 2006

Karen Arenson/NYT: Columbia Minuteman speech disruptors charged

The NYT reports ("Columbia Charges Students With Violating Protest Rules") that the students involved in the fracas at that university where students and others rushed the stage where Jim Gilchrist of the Minuteman Project was speaking and unfurled banners will face unspecified punishment. The possibilities include "disciplinary warning, censure, suspension and dismissal".

It being the NYT, their version of the events does not seem to comport with my recollections:

Protesters unfurled a banner on stage during one speech, and were then attacked by the speaker's supporters, including some from outside Columbia.

If those "attacks" were done out of self-defense or out of concern for the safety of those speaking, is "attacked" really the correct word?

Posted to Immigration at December 23, 2006 11:57 PM

Comments

jim Gilchrist is a great guy what he is doing is great, but the end game is here and now, the minuteman just don't get what has happened in fact most people who still think this is a real nation are sad people, the government has sold you down the river and when you get that point you can start to do something for your own life or do nothing and become a target for the gang rulers that will be going to washington.

as far as the students go nothing will happen, the so called students are useful to the rats in mexico city and to the terrorists in washington and many other places around the world.

Posted by: Fred Dawes at December 24, 2006 02:29 AM

Have you noticed that, while certain leftists call those who want our immigration laws enforced Nazis, they are, in fact, the ones who employ Nazi tactics like shutting down free speech?

Posted by: D Flinchum at December 24, 2006 05:33 AM