NEWS
CAN criticizes Horowitz funding call
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Pedro Oliveira Jr.:
- Research finds rapid evolution (December 13, 2007)
- CAN criticizes Horowitz funding call (December 13, 2007)
- Enough already: More snow hits area (December 12, 2007)
- Security bills rile UW GOP group (December 11, 2007)
- Students want to aid Iraqi scholars (December 11, 2007)
Related Stories:
- UW to pay for security costs (December 12, 2007)
- Security bills rile UW GOP group (December 11, 2007)
- Horowitz event sparking protests (October 22, 2007)
- Horowitz rips left, defends war (October 23, 2007)
- Giuliani planning trip to Milwaukee (October 8, 2007)
by Pedro Oliveira Jr.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
The University of Wisconsin's decision Tuesday to pay nearly $1,300 in security fees for a student event has sparked concern among representatives of some liberal-oriented groups on campus.
After an Oct. 22 event organized by the College Republicans generated an expensive security bill, chair Sara Mikolajczak said the group would be unable to afford the charges.
UW junior Zach Heise, an active member of the Campus Antiwar Network, said the number of police was "most definitely not" necessary and disagreed with UW paying for the security fees.
The "most interesting" thing to happen, Heise added, was former UW lecturer Kevin Barrett yelling at Horowitz during the lecture before being asked to leave the room.
"There was absolutely no problem, and the university is being publicly billed for this thing, and it just doesn't seem fair to me," Heise said. "I don't think that, for example, if CAN had a speaker that they would have security guards around them, and if they did, I think it should be our responsibility to pay for security."
Heise added he has been to many protests, and none of these times has security been necessary. "They're always there for the 'just in case.' But I don't think the 'just in case' is worth $1,300," Heise said.
But Casey Nagy, executive assistant for the chancellor, said the money comes from private donations, and not taxpayer dollars or student tuition.
"This money comes from discretionary accounts held by the chancellor's office," Nagy said. "We use that money to fund student activities all the time."
Another CAN member, UW junior Rob Lewis, said it is understandable that security is needed, but said he condemns College Republicans for "bringing such a hateful speaker."
"Personally and morally I think that he never should have came here," Lewis said. "Would a Nazi speaker be allowed to speak? I'm not sure."
In a previous interview with The Badger Herald, Nagy said even though he does not expect UW would be "picking up the tab timer after time," it is in the campus interest to make events like the Horowitz visit happen.
College Democrats Chair Oliver Kiefer said though he disagreed with Horowitz's point, it is always important to defend the First Amendment.
"For me to know that my free speech will be protected, everyone else's free speech should also be protected," Kiefer said.
Kiefer said he is pleased UW moved to address the situation in timely fashion, taking into account both the needs of security on campus and the issue free speech.
"A lot of people gave us a hard time for bringing someone as controversial as Mr. Horowitz, but as far as I'm concerned, if you don't bring in someone like that, it's not going to ignite interest," Mikolajczak said. "If you don't ignite interest, what's the point of even having an event?"
Mikolajczak added Horowitz was very controversial but he filled the Union Theater, "and that's really what we were going for."
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 12:48am):
The College Republicans shouldn't have to pay police security bills that were only incurred because of protesters. We have a right to free speech in this country. An organization that invites someone, however controversial, to share their opinions shouldn't be punished... especially because of a bunch of crazy liberals that are incapable of listening to views different than their own without getting up in arms about it.
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 12:49am):
college republicans shouldn't have to pay it. how about the idiots making death threats pay it... seriously wtf
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 5:46am):
Rob Lewis:
How dare you call David Horowitz a Nazi. He comes from a Jewish family, after all. I don't support most of Mr. Horowitz's ideas, but I do support his right to say it. Mr. Lewis can go to a truly repressive country like Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela and see how long he could express his views without ending up in prison.
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 8:04am):
Too bad CAN members and others on the left feel they have to make threats and break things to shush one who disagrees with their point of view. If they acted more like most on the right, all would be peaceful and there would be no need for additional security at such functions.
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 9:21am):
Bill the protesters. Sell protest tickets?
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 9:45am):
"Personally and morally I think that he never should have came here," Lewis said. "Would a Nazi speaker be allowed to speak? I'm not sure."
You fool.
The answer is YES! Of COURSE they should be allowed to come here!
ANYONE, from Mahmood Ahmedinejhad to Hitler to Horowitz to Michael Moore should have been given the right to come and speak.
Then you have the right to rip their arguments to shreds.
Idiots like you are those who cry about first-amendment rights being trampled on, and then partake in the silencing yourself.
(And I'm writing this as a liberal Zionist Jew).
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 10:10am):
Then the student of color groups shouldn't have to pay for extra security when they have hip-hop events or controversial speakers. Fair is fair, right?
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 10:34am):
the school shouldn't pay because CAN was protesting and threatening to disrupt a student event, but they should pay for the Iraqis who CAN want to come to Wisconsin.
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 10:58am):
How dare you call David Horowitz a Nazi. He comes from a Jewish family, after all. I don't support most of Mr. Horowitz's ideas, but I do support his right to say it. Mr. Lewis can go to a truly repressive country like Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela and see how long he could express his views without ending up in prison.
he's not calling him a Nazi, read it over dumbass
Amy Sawyers (December 13, 2007 @ 12:30pm):
It is University Policy that the police must coordinate security needs with the student groups. I think that in this case and many cases,the coordination did not happen. The police should be very clear as to what they are charging, and try to build that into a budget well before an event happens. This isn't an isolated event either. The Alliance for Programing Equality meets bi-weekly with UW PD to address issues like this.
Anonymous (December 13, 2007 @ 2:38pm):
I just think its interesting that the administration took such supportive steps and responded is such a timely manner for College Republicans. Where were they student of color organizations were under scrutiny with UW-Police.
Anonymous (December 14, 2007 @ 12:05am):
"If they acted more like most on the right, all would be peaceful and there would be no need for additional security at such functions."
But you see, therein lies the beauty of individuality - the ability to express oneself in ways different from others. What you say is kind of like saying, "I don't ger art, artists should express their feelings by writing." If the right can't handle a bunch of "looney leftists" (as some on the right so lovingly call us) who appear and peacefully protest DAVE without call for alarm ... I don't know guys. I admit, some of the left go a tad strong on their actions for my taste, but, so do some of the right, if not with actions then definitely with words.
I know Zach's concern is the fact that he in no way supports Horowitz and his views and therefore does not want any money that he has given to the school to be given to help fund the infamous DAVE. I feel the exact same way. Horowitz had every right to come here, the CR's had every right to bring him. But I in no way comply with the administration using my money to fund this event. As long as its not my money fine, and as long as its a one time thing in regards to the CR's in general.
Happy Holidays.
Zach Heise (December 14, 2007 @ 3:50am):
This is a matter of fact and your made-up fiction.
The fact: Our university is paying for security for an event that was through the College Republicans. If an organization wants to host an event, they should be ready to pay whatever bills come their way. When CAN had its conference here in Madison in October, we went through the student org SFC funding channels...we didn't gripe to the administration after the fact.
Your fiction: "CAN threatening to disrupt the event" - if you knew what you were talking about, you would know that CAN protested before the event, and then sat and chuckled quietly throughout the event. You'd probably have seen more disruption if you went to an English 100 class and sat in the back rows.
The laughably stupid fiction: "If they acted more like most on the right, all would be peaceful and there would be no need for additional security at such functions." I hope that everyone reading these sees the sickening irony of that statement when "most on the right" were all for a bloody war that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and thousands more to come be it by the bullet, the radiation, or starvation. You, sir or ma'am, are a fool.
Anonymous (December 14, 2007 @ 10:31am):
945am
there are no liberal zionist jews.
your party hates you.
get some courage, wake up, and come to the 'dark side' where your intentions are never given the benefit of the doubt by open minded libs.
Anonymous (December 14, 2007 @ 6:49pm):
Thug @ 3:50am snarked: "You'd probably have seen more disruption if you went to an English 100 class"
Yep. Police presence tends to quite the cowardly anti-war vigilantee. Then again, we know what happens when unhinged anti-war thugs are unrestrained.
Here's a surprisingly fair report from the New York Times on the violence and harassment faced by campus military recruiters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/nyregion/21recruit.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Excerpt:
"Since the beginning of 2003, there have also been more than a dozen other often violent incidents aimed at military recruiters or property throughout the country, according to the police, recruiters and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. In a few cases, vehicles have been set on fire; in others, blood has been thrown through windows. Spokespeople for the armed services have downplayed the incidents even as some recruiters have increased security at their stations."
[Among the incidents chronicled]
"On Jan. 31, authorities said, recruiters at a station near the Flatiron section of Manhattan reported that a door had been cracked, and that anarchist symbols had been scrawled in red paint on the building.
"That same day, before dawn, the police arrested a 19-year-old Manhattan College junior who they said threw a burning rag into an Army recruiting station that was closed for the night in the Parkchester section of the Bronx, and jammed the door locks with powerful glue. He was caught carrying a handwritten note declaring that a 'wave of violence' would occur throughout the Northeast on Jan. 31, aimed at the 'military industrial complex' in response to American military actions, the police said."
The New York Times article also makes brief reference to a cowardly attack in Toledo, where antiwar extremists threw a bucket of manure into the office and painted an obscenity on the wall.
http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2005/02/14526_comment.php
Not much info on prosecutions of the anti-war vigilantees responsible for these seditious attacks. So much for "opposing the war and supporting the troops," huh?
Badger police should be congratulated for keeping a close watch on the local CAN thugs. It's a disgusting state of affairs that academia is forced to take extra security measures just to guarantee civil dialogue-- apparently, this is the price society pays for tolerating Leftist vigilantism on campus.
Anonymous (December 14, 2007 @ 7:01pm):
Idiotarian @ 3:50am drooled: "I hope that everyone reading these sees the sickening irony of that statement when "most on the right" were all for a bloody war that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths"
Was there "irony" in the hundreds of thousands of dead Shinto-fascists that Truman firebombed and nuked? Of course not.
"War is a terrible thing, but not the worst thing. Our military men and women have endured the dangers and deprivations of war so that the worst thing would not befall us, so that America might be secure in her freedom."
John McCain
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/Speeches/a8a873e7-1d1d-4f66-a41c-eb536d20d452.htm
Anonymous (December 14, 2007 @ 9:38pm):
Hey Zach, I wonder if you would have behaved yourself during the presentation had there not been the added security.
I have a great idea, if an organization has an event that requires security because a bunch of spoiled children and left leaning nut cases wish to silence the organization, the organization (or individuals) sponsoring the distruptive behavior should be billed for the added security! If you are going to be disruptive, you should be forced to pay whatever the cost of the disruption. After all, if you get into a car accident, the one who caused the damage pays.
Perhaps someday you will grow up, Zach, and be able to tell the difference between an apple and an orange, because the conclusions you are drawing with your convoluted logic show you do not know the difference. Using your logic, I could probably put killing someone because they looked at me funny on the same plane as killing someone because they pointed a gun at me (it may not have been loaded, but everyone thought it was, including the dems and the rest of the world).
Anonymous (December 16, 2007 @ 11:14am):
So you feel that because the University incorrectly estimated the number of security forces, that they should be given a free pass for the mistake they made?
Anonymous (December 17, 2007 @ 4:13am):
This is a poor job of reporting, you took two opinions within a much larger group and used it to generalize all of CAN. These two people, while respected members of CAN, had no authority to speak for the entire group on this issue, as they would be quick to tell you. I am also member of CAN and though I protested the event I was expressing my free speech just as Horowitz was expressing his.
Though I think that CR should have paid for their own speaker as I feel that each group should pay for their own speakers I understand the reality of the limited budget of college students and a unexpected bill of 1,300 dollars is a little nuts.
I understand if you don't want to post this, but reading this article I was a little surprised. Mr. Oliveira you normally do a better job of producing fair and responsible articles.
Anonymous (December 17, 2007 @ 1:04pm):
Fellow CRs, it's no biggie, my dad will pick up the $1300 bill, he just cut costs by hiring some illegal aliens
Anonymous (December 18, 2007 @ 11:16am):
Yes the Violent Liberals are the problem, they are the ones that support the right to life, unless your an abortion doctor then they shoot you in the head. It the liberals that stifle debate on religion, not the right that says that you can't question the bible, because it the word of God. It was written by men, and we screw up even the tiniest of things.
Anonymous (December 18, 2007 @ 11:24am):
wow there's a whole lot of Anonymous how come Zack was the only one man enough to be public about his comments
Anonymous (December 18, 2007 @ 10:58pm):
"I feel the exact same way. Horowitz had every right to come here, the CR's had every right to bring him. But I in no way comply with the administration using my money to fund this event. As long as its not my money fine, and as long as its a one time thing in regards to the CR's in general."
it wasn't your money, idiot. it was from the dean's discretionary fund that comes from money from alumni to put in that fund so that uw can do what it sees necessary. learn what you're talking about.
Anonymous (December 20, 2007 @ 7:18pm):
Anonymous idiotarian @ 11:24am whined: "how come Zack was the only one man enough to be public about his comments"
You first, hero.
Anonymous (December 20, 2007 @ 10:51pm):
Security was necessary with the group getting death threats just for sponsoring the event. Also Barrett was never asked to leave. The UWPD specifically refrained from getting involved to keep from giving him yet another soapbox from which to spew his idiocy. The animosity from the 1300 people in the audience was more than enough to convince him to leave.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
