The Death of Freedom of Speech
Nothing highlights the death so much as the events at an Emory University lecture as part of the Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. The event began in this manner:
As soon as Horowitz was introduced, protesters began their efforts with loud boos and chants of “Heil Hitler.” Despite the people who stood with their backs to Horowitz and the shouting of obscenities and other remarks from audience members, Horowitz attempted to deliver his speech that covered academic freedom and radical Islam. Considering the actions of the audience and the problem of universities only giving students half the story, Horowitz asked the audience, “How can you learn if you can’t see the arguments?” This event was a perfect example of the left’s intolerance to other points of view. Students who had the opportunity to ask questions they wrote down on index cards were never given the chance to hear them answered because of the actions of those who do not believe in free speech for those who hold opposing points of view.
About halfway through the article detailing the events there is this:
As soon as Horowitz commented on radical Islam waging war against the West, someone predictably yelled, “do you think it has anything to do with Israel’s treatment of Palestine?” When Horowitz talked about Christians burning Jews at the stake during the crusades and Jews finding Muslims to be more hospitable, someone shouted “That’s exactly what Ann Coulter is calling for now.” When Horowitz mentioned that Jews and Christians are now treated as second class citizens in much of the Muslim world, a loud applause shot up from the audience. When Horowitz tried to bring up the treatment of women and issues such as female genital mutilation (FGM), the audience chanted, “That’s not Islam.”
“I’ve spoken at Emory University several times and I’ve never seen it this bad,” said Horowitz responding to the crowd as they shouted and jeered. “This is exactly what the fascists did in Germany in the 1930s.” The loud chants, sign-waving, and disruptive gestures continued to escalate from audience members until the atmosphere was so chaotic that even the police present were unable to subdue the crowd. Horowitz was led off stage and left the campus under tight security, and the event came to an abrupt end. After Senior Vice Provost for Community and Diversity Ozzie Harris announced that audience members should sit down and let the speech continue or risk being forcibly removed, protesters shouted, “Everybody stand up, they can’t take us all!” and “Stand up in solidarity!” At the end, when Horowitz’ speech could no longer continue, chants of “This is what democracy looks like” shot up throughout the audience.
Clearly Mr. Horowitz doesn’t have the right to free speech under the Bill of Rights in our Constitution. He, as well as others present were shut down rather than allowed to speak. One of our rights under the Constitution is no longer guaranteed. Any opinion or thought that doesn’t reflect the left’s ideology is summarily shut down in any way possible.
Another attempt at shutting out happened on Capitol Hill . While some may argue that it was Code Pink’s right to free speech that was obstructed, if you watch the entire video, it was Farooz’s attempt to disrupt Ms. Rice’s testimony that was obstructing free speech. Farooz wanted to shut down the process with her antics… which she managed to do for two full minutes. While no one can know for certain, given the intensity of the verbal assault and Farooz’s demeanor, one has to wonder if Farooz might have physically attacked Rice had she been allowed to continue her assault in full view of members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Nor does anyone know how much the assault affected Ms. Rice’s ability deliver her testimony and answer succeeding questions. On HRP, Falcon believes there should be an investigation and I agree but there won’t be one. We all know it. Read some of the other comments there.
While the above are examples of overt obstruction of free speech, there are other ways it is obstructed. Consider the burial of facts in order to color news stories a certain way to fit a certain agenda, such as what happened with the Jena 6 Story and the Duke Rape Case. Consider the Scott Beauchamp Story which is still reverberating through the media.
The death of free speech is a sad thing to behold. One can only imagine what will replace her. I’ll leave such imaginings to sturdier hearts than mine.
October 26th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Great post, Steph, liberals are terrified of debate – a tacit acknowledgment that they can’t defend their arguments with logic.
When my daughter was three and I was trying to teach her how to play hide and seek, I told her she could go hide and I would count to ten. I closed my eyes and counted to ten, when I opened my eyes, there she sat. Her eyes were covered and she assumed that since she couldn’t see me, I couldn’t see her.
This is the modern day liberal. If they close their eyes and cover their ears to uncomfortable ideas and reality they assume that the reality ceases to be. They don’t want to be at war with terrorists – so they declare peace – the idea that the terrorists won’t be so inclined never occurs to them. Apparently they are under the misconception that if the terrorists got to know us they wouldn’t want to kill us. You can’t negotiate with someone who has already given you their final terms, convert or die.
These are people that consider the President the enemy and the terrorists misunderstood. It really makes me want to box up the lot of them and send them to Iran for a day. OK – forever. Who would miss them here?
October 27th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Regarding “box up the lot of them and send them to Iran for a day. OK – forever. Who would miss them here?” Some may consider the President the enemy, though I doubt a whole lot. On the other hand, there are: http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm quite a few who are at odds with the President’s performance. If we ship these 200,000,000 to Iran forever, housing would be cheap, Georgia would have water and
there would be no one to argue with.
October 27th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Forgot to mention regarding the hecklers at the Horowitz speech: wasn’t there some charactor hassling John Kerry that got tasered awhile back? Electricity knows no party, what’s fair is fair…respectful disagreement is one thing, in your face shouting is another.
October 28th, 2007 at 10:59 am
The kid who was tazed, BB – was a liberal. Turns out he wanted to be tazed. Noticed. Drudge had an article on it – but I didn’t save the link.
And I’m only interested in deporting the anti-American faction of the Anti-American party.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
I love the deportations discussions! How many Anti-Americans in the Anti-American faction of the Anti-American party? (Is it just the members of MoveOn.org and the ACLU?)
Hillbilly, I think to claim that there is a violation of the right to free speech in those circumstances is a real stretch.
The first amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
I don’t think in this case Congress did anything to prevent Horowitz and his buddies from speaking.
Just for the record, I am personnaly not a fan of preventing people from speaking. But, in some cases, it does appear necessary. Consider for example the case of Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) in Rwanda that spread hate and encouraged genocide.
I am not saying that what Horowitz is saying is in any way comparable to what RTLM did, but I just want to show that sometimes the right to speak clearly infringes on other rights (like the right to live).
October 29th, 2007 at 2:47 am
“Hillbilly, I think to claim that there is a violation of the right to free speech in those circumstances is a real stretch. ”
Okay, let’s do it the other way around, then.
Let’s say the next time Al Gore lectures on global warming, there are a bunch of hecklers in the back raising such a ruckus.
How many of those hecklers do you think will be physically removed and get arrested for disorderly conduct, at the very least?
Let’s say I’m one of the hecklers. When I get arrested, shall I quote you (being a legal expert) that Congress didn’t guarantee the rest of us couldn’t abridge free speech? Do you think it will get the charges dropped?
October 29th, 2007 at 8:11 am
You are free to heckle any speaker you wish: it is termed ‘civil disobedience’ and you take your chances. Horowitz isn’t the only victim, for Gore getting heckled see:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/gore061899.htm
http://talk.livedaily.com/showthread.php?t=574817
October 29th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Wapo: In one brief but tense exchange in New Hampshire, the protesters stood yelling just a few feet from Gore before being escorted out by police.
In the above post, Horowitz was led out, not the protestors, which proves my point.
Good try, though.
October 29th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
The first amendment is about Congress making rules. If I own a business and you start yelling to my clients that I employ illegal aliens, I believe I can have you kicked out because of trespassing. Even if it is the police that arrests you.
But, the Fed government can’t pass a law that says you can’t blog about this pertinent issue. That would be a violation of your first amendment.
If you want to push for a broader freedom of speech right, I will be among those supporting you.
But in the meantime, when you get arrested, please don’t quote me, because I am not a lawyer yet and hence can’t give legal advice
.
Related to BB-Idaho’s point: last week, code pink protestors were kicked out of the Condi hearings for voicing their opinions…
October 29th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Ms. Farooz accosted Ms. Rice. Ms. Farooz invaded Ms. Rice’s personal space. She was close enough to do physical damage without any type of special weapon. A pencil or pen would have done at that proximity. There’s a difference between heckling at the back of a room, regardless of how loud and obnoxious you are doing it, and invading someone’s personal space and interfering with a congressional hearing.
As far as yelling at a business’ customers, it would really depend on where I’m standing as to whether I could be arrested for trespassing. If I’m in the store, of course I can be arrested but if I’m standing on public property, it’s iffy. Depends on whether I’m disturbing the peace or not at that point. However, they’d probably call me a racist and get me for hate speech first.
All in all, Mr. Horowitz and others have the right to speak. Those who protested, disrupted, and shut down the lecture before it could properly begin had a right to disagree but not allowing him to speak at all was an abridgment of free speech… or they could have just not shown up for the lecture at all. No one twisted their arms and made them go. They attended with the express purpose of: not allowing Mr. Horowitz to speak.
Don’t worry, AC, I’m not the heckling kind. I’d rather ask questions and get straight answers… not that that happens very often these days… but I do know how to keep asking until I get answers… without ever resorting to heckling…
October 29th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Oh, btw… I have a couple of new posts to make and I feel guilty about neglecting my posting duties so I’ll be posting one here and one at HRP… If I don’t fall asleep too early, I’ll post tonight. If I do, well, I’ll post them tomorrow.
October 29th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
The one that came close to Condi clearly invaded her personal space. I was referring to the ones in the room that were just heckling … “nicely”
.
I am not a fan of people that prevent other from speaking, and I am really disappointed in came down to this.
They would call you a racist? Hate speech? I don’t believe that!!! Anyways even if you were a heckler, I don’t plan to do litigation… On the other hand if you want to do some corporate work (Mergers and Acquisitions, Securitization, etc.), then I might be the right guy!
October 30th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
They would, AC. They really would. It wouldn’t matter that they would be wrong. All that would matter was I was protesting something that the PC crowd thinks I shouldn’t. I have been called a racist already for speaking out against illegal aliens. Why would I expect a public protest to end any differently?
Nicely, you say?
http://www.townhall.com/content/603407eb-7815-44b5-80fb-47e13a6735ee
I haven’t seen much peaceful out of the peaceniks. They go way beyond holding up signs and we really have no idea what those others were doing in the back of the room because Farooz’s voice overpowered just about every other sound in the room. I do recall they had to be carried out of the room. Considering they came as a group with Farooz… well…