More balanced than the International Socialists, but please, can someone show me an act of violence commited by the Minutemen? They are no more violent than a neighborhood watch, other than they are protecting more than themselves. If there has been an act of violence, what were the circumstances?

If someone was breaking into your dorm room or apartment and your neighbor acted to stop the break in (asked nicely at first and were met with a fist, knife, or gun), would it be considered vigilante justice if your neighbor immobilized them to prevent the crime?

It is interesting, you seem to listen to the pap about the minutemen breaking the law (and they have not), yet you have total disregard for law when it comes to ILLEGAL ALIENS!

No wonder the left has little credibility!

Nixon discredited 4 protestors at Kent State. Did I say discredited, my bad, I meant killed.

“In their violent protests”

Whose? If you watch the CTV and Univision coverage, you can see that as soon as kids got on stage, Gilchrist’s goons attacked them, with one kid getting kicked in the head. And you’re calling Columbia students violent?

If you watched the O’Reilly Factor following the event, you’d know that he strictly defended and promoted the Minutemen Project, calling Columbia “University of Havana North”. He also lied about the message on the students’ banners—while they said “no one is illegal,” he claimed they for some strange reason denied the Holocaust. That this would upset a group that actively recruits from white power and neo-Nazi groups amazes me, but this is what you’re supporting, Gabbie.

Further, President Bollinger took a more neutral stance towards the protest after seeing actual footage (despite initial outrage over the Minutemen’s hurt feelings). Organizer Karina Garcia squared off against Gilchrist in a radio debate, and after Garcia brought up the “kicking of the head” incident, Gilchrist told the moderator that it was against his lawyer’s advice to say anything further and left. Does that sound like the behavior of someone who was clearly victimized?

For a “leftist” freshman, you’re really quick to criticize anything left of moderate.

Unhinged Leftists are a growing phenomenon in American politics; http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003801.htm

from socialistworker.org:

Activists under fire for protesting Minutemen racists at Columbia No time to be silent

THE PROTEST against the anti-immigrant Minutemen at Columbia University and the national media uproar that followed highlight both the growing threat of the far right and the challenges facing those who want to confront racism.

The planned speech by Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist at Columbia was part of an effort by the racist group to gain a foothold on college campuses—and to further burnish the group's newly "respectable" image.

It wasn't a surprise that the right-wing media would turn the facts on their heads and use the protest to accuse immigrant rights supporters of violence and attacking "free speech." But unfortunately, some liberals and even radicals joined in the denunciations. Progressive magazine editor Matthew Rothschild said the Columbia protest was "a defeat for free speech worthy not of progressives, but of goons." Jon Stewart of the Daily Show claimed the protesters made Sean Hannity of Fox News "look like the reasonable one."

Such arguments display both ignorance of what Gilchrist and the Minutemen represent, and disrespect for the historical commitment of the left to speak out against racism and oppression.

The issue of the Columbia protest has been framed as a narrow question of free speech—for Gilchrist only, it seems, not those who protested him—when the important issue is the responsibility of anyone who opposes racism not to let it go unchallenged.

NOT LONG ago, the virulently anti-immigrant ideas that Gilchrist champions were consigned to the right-wing margins of U.S. politics. But the crackpot right's position on immigration has been legitimated by the conservative shift in mainstream politics.

Though Bush and a variety of Republicans and Democrats would prefer to include a corporate-backed guest-worker program, both parties overwhelmingly agree that the starting point of immigration policy must be the draconian border enforcement measures championed by the Minutemen.

Gilchrist and his vigilantes are the shock troops for the right-wing offensive on immigration, formed to mobilize armed patrols to harass immigrants at the border. Lurking just beneath the surface are the Ku Klux Klan and other neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups—as watchdog organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center have shown.

When these bigots are given a platform at a prestigious university such as Columbia, it further solidifies the far right's presence in the mainstream debate and gives them additional legitimacy.

As the Columbia protesters said in a statement soon after the event, "We are sure that if the Nazi party held a public meeting on campus, Jewish groups would be there to challenge them—so would we. We are sure that if the Ku Klux Klan held a public meeting on campus, African American groups would be there to challenge them—so would we. The Minutemen are no different."

Nevertheless, the Minutemen's claims about what took place at Columbia during the October 4 forum were accepted and promoted unquestioningly by the mainstream media.

But video footage circulating on the Internet corroborates the protesters' version of events. The "protesters rushing the stage," which featured in almost every media account, consisted of two demonstrators unfurling a banner on the stage 45 minutes into the program. The audience, grown increasingly angry with the Minutemen's message, loudly showed their support, and some followed the lead of the two demonstrators.

Minutemen supporters and College Republican sponsors of the event physically attacked the immigrant rights supporters—television footage shows one Latino student being kicked in the head by a right-winger.

In this context, the claim that the Minutemen's right to "free speech" was violated begs some questions: Did the audience members who opposed them not have a right to speak? Were they obligated to stay silent while the Minutemen spread their message? Do the Minutemen have some right to not be protested?

The double standards about free speech were evident in the reaction of Columbia University officials as well. University President Lee Bollinger has denounced the anti-Minutemen protesters, but two years ago, when faculty supporters of Palestinian rights came under attack—from some of the same media outlets and politicians now hounding the students—Bollinger said the university didn't have to respect their First Amendment rights because Columbia is a "private institution."

Yet Columbia administrators are preparing to punish the student protesters. If they do, they will send a message that it is acceptable for the Minutemen to meet peaceful protest with racist violence, and that the victims of violence will suffer the consequences.

IN THE 1960s, one of the important stages in the development of the anti-Vietnam War movement came when the State Department sent a team of speakers on a tour of college campuses.

Representing the authority of the U.S. government and implicitly endorsed by university officials, the tour was meant to regain the initiative in the growing debate over Vietnam. Fortunately, these speakers were met by jeering students—a few were driven off the stage by chanting and booing.

Those protests marked a recognition by student activists that following the rules of polite discourse would be a step away from the goal of ending the war.

Knowing now the full scope of what was taking place in Vietnam, no one who deserves to be called progressive would say those students were wrong to confront the State Department propagandists—that the antiwar activists should have remained silent out of respect for the "right" of the war machine to excuse its killing.

Minutemen leaders like Gilchrist are no less propagandists, but for a different war—a racist war on immigrants. They need to be confronted and challenged. And that's what happened at Columbia.

As the Columbia protesters point out, in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King wrote that the "great stumbling block is not the White Citizen’s Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate…who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action.'"

Anyone who cares about justice or freedom should support the Columbia students who stood up against racist hate.

The international socialists can be equated with lazy, rabid, sheep. They follow a leader, who spews garbage with little or no basis fact. No one within questions the leader's spewings and follows blindly. If you agree with the great leader, you are entitled to free speech, if you do not agree with the great leader, you will those same rights do not apply. The leadership has to make up lies and misinformation to keep the sheep in line and foaming at the mouth.

Gabbie, you disagree with the Minutemen, why? What is your solution to the rising issues with illegal aliens? Name one incident that has occurred (I have heard of no incidents, but you and the ISO's keep saying the Minutemen are violent) that would have happened had the individuals, recently acquiring the title, "illegal alien" had stayed on their side of the border and lived within the law.

Request for disciplinary action against the Columbia University students who assaulted Jim Gilchrist http://www.petitiononline.com/cw2006a/petition.html

To: Columbia University On October 4, the College Republicans at Columbia University hosted Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist. Rather than respect the rights of the College Republicans and Minuteman to express their opinions in an academic setting, a group of students rushed the stage in a violent manner and prevented Mr. Gilchrist from making his speech.

The spirit of academic freedom, as well as freedom of speech, requires that all views be allowed and encouraged to express themselves. We the undersigned hereby call on Columbia University to discipline the students involved in disrupting Mr. Gilchrist’s speech by suspending the participants for a period of not less than six weeks, and expelling the leaders of the group, from all university activities.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?cw2006a

“If someone was breaking into your dorm room or apartment and your neighbor acted to stop the break in…”

That’s assuming “your neighbor” is roaming the halls just waiting to pounce on a burglar. Your neighbor who roams the halls would also have to be draped in the American flag, carrying a loaded weapon (just in case), and have irrational thoughts about what burglars actually do during robery (like rape your couch).

In this scenario, the burglar is likely the ballanced person.

Presuming that Gabbie Wade 1) recognizes that the Minutemen were the violent ones 2) bases her criticism on that the protesters appeared to be “shutting down Gilchrist’s free speech” and 3) is actually an opponent of the Minutemen then maybe she would use her space in her column to explain what actually happened. For starters why not describe the footage captured by Univision which clearly shows a member of the College Republicans pointing out a Latino to a member of the Minutemen who in turn kicks the Latino in the face. Or why not lambast the mainstream media (which, presumably, Gabbie - as a fighter in the struggle - understands to be deeply biased and anti-Immigrant) which refuses to tell the protesters half of the story. The NY Times, for example, had two versions of its story. The initial story included three paragraphs explaining what happened from the point of view of the protesters. When it came time to put it into print, somehow, those three paragraphs were slashed.

Instead Gabbie - like many liberals from Matt Rothschild of the Progressive to Jon Stewart of The Daily Show - are joining the a right-wing chorus which aims to have the immigrant rights activists expelled from Columbia University. Either they don’t understand what happened that night at Columbia or they’re not interested in protesting the Minutemen. No matter what’s happening inside Gabbie’s head it’s clear to the rest of us which side her article serves. It’s liberals, not the protesters, who discredit liberals. In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. explained: “[the] great stumbling block is not the White Citizen’s Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate…who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action.'"

-Chris Dols, chrisdols@mac.com

Yeah, Michelle Malkin is a reputable source.

Anyways, Gabbie, what have you ever done for the left to claim that you can speak on behalf of it, and make claims as to what is good for it?

A kick in the head seems fine to me. If they truly believe that “nobody is illegal,” they should head down to the station house and file a complaint.

Undoubtedly we need a comprehensive solution to the unlawful entry and overstayed visa problems that we face, but this solution will not be dictated to us by illegal aliens. Period.

Unhinged Leftists? If it weren’t for progressive thinkers your country would be a puritan version of Saudi Arabia. Think about the rights you currently enjoy, then think about how loud the left screams every time someone even thinks about nibbling away at them.

The Left wants to tax you excessively, you say. Wrong. The Left believes that America is losing their footing in the world and needs to focus on remaining number one in the world. Not necessarily number one militarily, but more importantly number one in quality of life, freedom, education, and healthcare. If the tax rate for the top 1 or 5% has to go back to 40% to afford 21st century social programs, so be it because they won’t miss it.

Moreover, I would be embarrassed to call myself conservative. Why would I ever be satisfied with the status quo? Shame on any college educated adult for turning their back on progress. You’ve failed yourself as a thinker and dreamer.

I think all comments on the event should refrain from talking about free speech as if it was a fundamental aspect of either the Minutemen’s presenation or the actions of the student protesters.

What precipitated the rushing of the stage was more than just a handful of students wanting to express their right to protest what Gilchrist was saying. And what I find so interesting about all the debates that have followed the controversy at Columbia is that they completely lack context. Trying to boil down the events of the evening into something so elemental as free speech is irresponsible as a reporter and leads the discussion in a direction that it shouldn’t go.

Report what actually happened and leave the commentary to an article where you can actually expound on the universal importance of free speech instead of using it to support poorly constructed criticisms of political activism.

—Danielle Fernandez (NC)

Yeah, patrolling the borders for people illegaly entering our country and then notifying law enforcement is really violent…give me a break!

The kids at Columbia did not even let Gilchrist speak - and here I thought the Left embraced free speech…

Michelle Malkin is indeed a very reputable journalist, author and regularly interviewed expert on FOX.

Which of her Unhinged Leftist mugshot collection is contested? Explain the nature of the objection and evidence (if any) to the contrary? http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003801.htm

Let's review, this is so fun!

The Minutemen are horrible because some carry guns and patrol the border scaring away would be illegal aliens. For those of you who do not know it, gun ownership is protected by the U.S. Constitution, crossing the border and illegally entering this country is not.

I have asked to be shown a single example of a member of the Minutemen being violent, no one has been able to show it. I must assume then, the claim to violence is totally baseless and those who claim such are blowing hot air. I will make this easier for you, can you show me an example of a member of the Minutemen breaking a single law "patrolling" the border? If so, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

One would think an organization that was willing to unleash violence against another to shut them up would at least be able to back up a claim, evidently, one would be wrong.

A previous poster said it best when he/she said, "Liberals discredit liberals".

“If the tax rate for the top 1 or 5% has to go back to 40% to afford 21st century social programs, so be it because they won’t miss it.”

And before you know it, they’ll foist that tax increase back onto the rest of us. Hey all you sexually-obsessed liberals, go find some other way to pay for all the illegitimate babies you had. Go hit up on someone else for all the money for the programs you need to coddle criminals. You screwed up your own life, now it’s time to pay for it. Why should someone who stayed in school, got a decent job and stayed out of trouble have to pay for a bunch of losers who acted like a bunch of bad-asses in their younger days? Too bad if they didn’t see the big letdown coming. Now you stupid liberals want working people to pay for their free ride? I don’t think so.

Yeah, let’s revoke all the social problems including education, health care, and welfare for the poor. Let’s see what becomes of our cities. Perhaps that money you’re saving in taxes would be well spent on a wall surrounding your property. You probably don’t understand why there is TV in prison either.

The writer shows her ignorance and that of other leftists by annoucing that the Minutemen are violent. They are not violent unless holding telephones is an act of violence. Also, she showed her own bias as to whether leftists are beneficial. Ultimately, they are violent themselves in order to achieve their desired political gains….just read the book, The Black Book of Communism. I am not a rightist but I would rather deal with the eroneous assumptions of the Chrisitans than the “End justifies the means” people. Columbia is an embarrassment as are many overly liberal institutions and just as stupid as Oral Roberts University agitators.

“And before you know it, they’ll foist that tax increase back onto the rest of us. Hey all you sexually-obsessed liberals, go find some other way to pay for all the illegitimate babies you had.”

Yeah… liberals unhinged.

“Michelle Malkin is indeed a very reputable journalist, author and regularly interviewed expert on FOX. Which of her Unhinged Leftist mugshot collection is contested? Explain the nature of the objection and evidence (if any) to the contrary?”

Well to start, FOX isn’t necessarily a bastion of reputation. I think she lost all credibility once she started spewing that she was glad those Japs got locked up in internment camps. As for “Unhinged Leftists”, looks like there’s an even larger and still growing list of republican politicians… leaking government secrets, bribery, chatting online with a 16 year old boy about masturbation…

but back to the point… why again are we so supportive of Gilchrist? Doesn’t he actively recruit minutemen from neo-Nazi and White Power groups? The minutemen themselves, who seem so bent on upholding the law, themselves routinely break laws to do so (see the videos of them attacking and harassing journalists, police and customers and trespassing at a Home Depot). Do that many students at UW really take their hoods off to go to class? Do you go to Sieg Heil parties? Do you dress up like Hitler every day EXCEPT Halloween? Sounds like a lot of people at Madison do, and it’s freakin’ scary.

As a fell speech libertarian, I have to agree.

Part of the First Amendment is providing a forum for political voices. Shouting down, sabotaging, or any other acts of hostility towards protestors are just as bad when opposing protesters do it, as when the government does.

Simply because one has the right to speak, doesn’t mean that one has the right to silence someone else.

Well done, and ignore the comments of those opposed because as you’ve pointed out, the test of free speech is our tolerance of that with which we disagree.