NEWS
Barrett faces flak in Oshkosh
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Joanna Pliner:
- Plan B debate takes stage at forum (March 24, 2006)
- Chemistry professor makes two 'firsts' in winning Howe honor (October 24, 2006)
- Students await Union decision (November 13, 2006)
- ASM textbook plan to take flight in fall (April 26, 2006)
- Player faces felony charge (December 1, 2006)
Related Stories:
- Barrett calls it quits for now (November 13, 2006)
- Green says no to 'libelous theories' (September 27, 2006)
- Barrett begins first day of classes (September 6, 2006)
- Barrett's act wearing thin on UW (September 4, 2006)
- Barrett plans trip to Morocco to seek 9/11 hijacker (May 4, 2007)
Share This:
by Joanna Pliner
Friday, October 27, 2006
OSHKOSH — As Kevin Barrett protesters demonstrated outside Reeve Memorial Union at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh Thursday, curious minds congregated inside to hear the lecture that may be all too familiar to Madison residents.
Barrett, who teaches Islam: Religion and Culture at UW-Madison, took the opportunity to speak to a new audience. UWO's College Greens, invited Barrett to speak at the UWO union.
UWO senior Jasmine James said knowledge of Kevin Barrett's scheduled appearance generated chaos on her campus. James added, the fact that Barrett's lecture was a ticketed event showed bias on the part of Campus Greens.
"I think that it's the people who participate in decent in American that should be respected," James said. "Anybody should be allowed to get in here, and now by putting tickets on it, it's like they're making a bigger deal out of something that doesn't necessarily need to be made a big deal out of."
Barrett was introduced by James Fetzer, University of Minnesota-Duluth professor and founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. The organization, of which Barrett is a member, suggests the events of Sept. 11, 2001, were an inside job conducted by the U.S. government.
Fetzer listed Barrett's academic credentials and expressed support of Barrett's employment and freedom of speech.
Since the summer, a primary condition of Barrett's employment at UW-Madison has been that he not present his beliefs as those of the university, and some have accused Barrett of coming close to violating that stipulation.
"Attacks on Kevin Barrett are grossly inappropriate and misconceived," Fetzer said. "Only the administration speaks for the institution."
But support for Barrett's presence was not universal throughout the Oshkosh campus.
Members of the UWO branch of College Republicans picketed outside the union, and several made their way to the lecture as well. Shortly after Barrett took the podium, UWO Police were forced to take action when dissenting students stood up and turned their backs to Barrett mid-lecture. The officers received applause as they escorted students out of the room.
One of the student demonstrators outside was UWO fifth-year senior Erin Kisley, who said that while she believes in academic freedom, Barrett is stepping over a thin red line.
"I don't want my student activity fees to be funding him to come here," Kisley said. "I think his teaching is wrong. I believe in freedom of speech, but as an education major, I also believe that you should be teaching facts instead of your own opinions."
Andrew Sabais, Chair of College Greens and UWO senior said many people view Barrett's presence at the university as an "embarrassment," but disagrees with Kisley.
"Tonight there is a big embarrassment for this university, and that is the College Republicans demonstrating outside against free speech," Sabais said.
Throughout his lecture, Barrett outlined details of his beliefs about the events of 9/11, including his belief that the World Trade Center towers fell because of a "controlled demolition," the lack of emergency reaction from the U.S. Air Force and other "radical implausibilities."
"To even look at this information is psychologically challenging," Barrett said. "This country is in dire straights, and we need your help to get the country back to the country we used to know."
Anonymous (October 27, 2006 @ 8:27am):
So, the gist of this story is...? Where is the rest of it? How many people attended the lecture? What were his sticking points? What was the general reaction of the audience? Positive? Negative? All you told me about were the protesters. I believe that is exactly the point of your story - to discredit and whitewash any and all scrutiny of our government. Well, I've learned to look beyond this type of "reporting" and support everything the 911 Truth Movement is doing - including educating the dumbed-down public, which got that way because of just this type of reporting.
Anonymous (October 27, 2006 @ 12:19pm):
"Tonight there is a big embarrassment for this university, and that is the College Republicans demonstrating outside against free speech," Sabais said.
I do wonder if this guy would say the same about any group that would demonstrate against a speech by Nazis or the KKK.
Anonymous (October 27, 2006 @ 12:23pm):
"Shortly after Barrett took the podium, UWO Police were forced to take action when dissenting students stood up and turned their backs to Barrett mid-lecture. The officers received applause as they escorted students out of the room."
wtf
Anonymous (October 27, 2006 @ 1:50pm):
Some good comments over at althouse:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2006/10/spot-free-speech-issue.html#comments
knoxgirl said...
...especially on the heels of the Minutemen thing at Columbia where the students shouted them down and stormed the stage. Standing up and turning your back is routine stuff--and a fairly respectful way to protest, in comparison. Hardly an offense that merits them being hauled out.
PatCA said...
The police confront respectful protestors like these Republicans and avoid mobs like the Columbia gang for the same reason the left attacks the US and studiously avoids criticism of Islam: one group will hurt you back, the other won't.
Anonymous (October 27, 2006 @ 6:39pm):
Just to be clear, I, Jasmine James, said "I think it's the people who participate in DISSENT in America that should be respected." Not decent, and there's a difference. Barrett came to Oshkosh in the light of academic freedom, a right reserved especially for professors. That is what the discussion was ultimately about, not an attempt to shake the foundation of American values. Indeed, he and his DISSENT are the epitome of a true American. Just as a side note, although the event was ticketed, perhaps in an attempt to gear it towards a specific audience, a lot of seats were empty because the Republican protesters bought seats and either never came or were removed for their rude and disruptive behavior. Indeed, we applauded when they were removed, as would any audience who wishes to offer the due respect to any speaker. This was an educational opportunity and I'm pleased to have witnessed it, especially as the media tries to eat away at academic freedom.
Anonymous (October 29, 2006 @ 11:29pm):
"were removed for their rude and disruptive behavior"
I'm waiting to see what happens if the autorities would even dare to remove left wingnut protestors who routinely shout down any speaker they disagree with. What would happen if Cheney tried to speak at UW? A quiet, respectfull audience? Or a near riot by lefties?
Anonymous (October 30, 2006 @ 12:52am):
Yes you should teach facts, but whose facts? Should he teach that Bush was brave and invaded Iraq because it planned 9/11? Or should he teach that Bush planned 9/11? Or even better, should he point out that there are a number of different explanations or variations to the truth, and instead encourage critical thinking skills in his students?
The press and the state legislature have claimed #2, but in reality it's closer to the third.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 12:03pm):
Erin, the facts are overwhelming!
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 1:31pm):
I am the Erin quoted in the article. Yes, the facts are overwhelming. OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST the conspiracy theory. The people who call President Bush the "dumbest president ever" are the same people who think he led the biggest, most intricate cover up in history. So which is it? Is he dumb? Or is he the smartest man in the world to be able to pull this one off? Check out popularmechanics.com This website proves every point made in the conspiracy theory WRONG.
