Milo Event Cancelled Amid Protests

Share:

It seems both the protesters and Milo Yiannopoulos got what they wanted.  The protesters got the controversial Breitbart figure’s event shut down and Milo got the notoriety and becomes a martyr for the right and their claim about an intolerant campus.

UC Davis issued a statement on Friday night, “After consulting with UC Davis Police Department and UC Davis Student Affairs officials, the Davis College Republicans canceled tonight’s event featuring Breitbart columnist Milo Yiannopoulos. The decision was made at about 7:00 pm, 30 minutes prior to the scheduled start of the event, after a large number of protesters blocked access to the venue, and it was determined that it was no longer feasible to continue with the event safely.”

“I am deeply disappointed with the events of this evening,” said Interim Chancellor Ralph J. Hexter. “Our community is founded on principles of respect for all views, even those that we personally find repellent. As I have stated repeatedly, a university is at its best when it listens to and critically engages opposing views, especially ones that many of us find upsetting or even offensive.”

The decision was not one made by Milo himself.

“My event at UC Davis tonight has been cancelled after violence from left-wing protesters,” read a post on Yiannopoulos’ Facebook page. “There are reports of hammers, smashed windows and barricades being torn away. The campus police can’t guarantee anyone’s safety so I’m not being allowed anywhere near the building. Stay safe, everyone.”

The university confirmed, however, that despite some reports to the contrary, “there were no broken windows or other property damage during the protest. Earlier in the evening, one person was arrested inside the venue. No further arrests were made. “

Meanwhile, Mr. Yiannopoulos  posted, “I’ll be marching through the UC Davis campus from 1 pm today, with Martin Shkreli and the College Republicans, to protest the cancellation of my event last night.”

The College Republicans added, “We will not stand for the repressive left perpetuating violence, censoring speech, and spreading hate.”

The Vanguard has, over the last month, received a large number of guest contributions on this topic.

In December, a student group wrote, “The use of campus facilities and resources to host and therefore legitimize a white nationalist runs completely counter to the stated goals of the University of California and serves as a direct threat towards traditionally marginalized groups on campus.”

They added that “we demand that UC Davis administrators remove Milo Yiannopoulos’ platform for spreading hate and bigotry on our campus and issue a statement condemning white nationalist rhetoric within our community. Now is the time for our university to take a firm stand and prove its commitment to inclusivity and egalitarianism in the face of growing exclusionist movements throughout the United States.”

While some have called for opposition to the event, that does not represent the view of the Vanguard. “The real test of free speech is those screaming at the top of their lungs something that you oppose with every ounce of your being – will you fight for them?” the Vanguard wrote in a December column.

In a statement to the UC Davis community earlier on Friday, Acting Chancellor Ralph Hextor wrote, “All of those who expressed concern referenced Mr. Yiannopoulos’s notoriety for making disrespectful and often offensive utterances directed at certain segments of our society, or global society, and for denigrating ideas with which he disagrees. They view the beliefs and statements in question, along with similar ones attributed to Mr. Shkreli, as being in sharp conflict with the type of institutional environment that UC Davis is committed to supporting—one that is inclusive and respectful to people of all backgrounds, and dedicated to the pursuit of deeper understanding through the free and civil exchange of ideas.”

He continued, “We affirm the right of our students—in this instance, the Davis College Republicans—to invite speakers to our campus. Any public university must do everything it can to make sure that all members of its community are free to express their views—both because free expression is a right guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution and enshrined in University of California policy, and because it is an essential ingredient of excellence in higher-education teaching and research.”

He would add, “[L]et me add my personal belief that a university is at its best, is most true to itself, and makes proper use of its unique intellectual resources when it listens to and critically engages opposing views, especially ones that many of us find upsetting or even offensive.”

The Davis Phoenix Coalition wrote the university “to express our condemnation and concern over the hateful rhetoric promoted by Mr. Yiannopoulos’ visit and the unsafe climate these types of speakers breed.”

They continued, “While fully understanding and believing in the power and importance of the First Amendment, we also know that language informs human action. Most hate crimes are primed, as was the one that prompted the formation of the Davis Phoenix Coalition, by the perpetrators using language to dehumanize their victims.”

At the same time, they agreed with law professor Alan Brownstein when “he rightly states that now is not the time for censorship and that now more than ever our right to free speech will be of utmost importance.”

Instead, they argued, “So if our only recourse to keep our democratic freedoms intact while promoting a world where all people are safe, respected and free from violence is to speak up against hateful rhetoric then we implore our community to speak up loudly, to join us in condemning intolerance, to renew our commitment to civil discourse and the respectful bridging of common values and differences in ideas.”

Finally, Sean Raycraft, an organizer and a Vanguard Board Member, wrote in Davis College Republicans Have A Lot To Answer For On Milo, “the College Republicans have invited the elephant to our community, knowing its going to step on a lot of mice.”

He adds, “As far as I am concerned, the College Republicans THEMSELVES are responsible for the hurt and pain caused by Milo coming here. Milo is what he is, they know that, the community knows that, and so does Milo. They have a lot to answer for.”

The Vanguard messaged the College Republicans asking for a response and never received a response.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

143 thoughts on “Milo Event Cancelled Amid Protests”

  1. Ols Keith

    So in the future are all UCD speakers going to have to pass a litmis test to see if they might be repulsive to any segment of the campus community or are only speakers that the left deem as unacceptable are to be shut down?

    This is a sad day on the UC Davis campus.

    1. David Greenwald Post author

      I’m troubled by what transpired. I say that as someone not unsympathetic to their overall concerns and as I stated yesterday, I think people were looking for something to fight against which was not 3000 miles away. But protesting and making a point without shutting it down would have been better. Now they have, as Joseph implies, handed Milo a bigger hammer.

      1. Ols Keith

        No, they were free but all taken right away.  There was going to be admittance for people who didn’t have tickets because the College Republicans knew that the agitators had taken most of them but said they felt anyone who showed up could get in.  The leftist free speech shutting down fascists saw to it that the event would not go on.

        1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

          Ols

          Did listen this guy ever or watch him on YouTube . I don’t know why people or leftists  calling him fascist . He is a political clown. In the different time  era the  fascist  or communist would kill him and  if he would live in the  McCarthy era in USA than  he would land in psychiatric hospital or prison .

  2. Tia Will

    The College Republicans added, “We will not stand for the repressive left perpetuating violence, censoring speech, and spreading hate.”

    This is a truer statement than I believe than many of the College Republicans would like to admit. They will not stand for the “repressive left” perpetuating violence, but had no problems with themselves initiating it. Please note the use of the word “perpetuating”. Perpetuating does not mean initiating, it means continuing. It is clear in this case who the initiators of potential violence and spreaders of hatred are. MY profits directly from spreading hatred and the idea that violence is or should be within the normal realm. One example for those who do not believe that this is true. Check out his comments about female gamers who he stated if they felt threatened ( by his minions threats to rape and kill them) that they should just stop gaming. From previously referenced article on Breibart.

      1. Tia Will

        Ols Keith

        “Tia Will, I thought you were all for letting MY speak.  Your comments suggest otherwise.”

        I was and am all for letting MY speak. That does not mean that I do not consider him a purveyor of hate, fear and violence. It also does not mean that I do not believe that the aggressive and hateful behavior began with him and those who knowingly invited him. Please clarify which of my comments you perceive as contradictory.

         

        1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

          I was and am all for letting MY speak. That does not mean that I do not consider him a purveyor of hate, fear and violence

          Tia

          Would you let Milo  speak if you would be  an owner of the  amphitheater and he would inquired  to speak in your amphitheater and pay you for using your place for his show?

           

  3. Paul Lukasiak

    It appears that this protest started out completely peacefully — until Milo sent in his provocateurs armed with cameras into the crowd.  Naturally, the protesters told these racists to get the “F” out of their protest… and things started getting ugly, and the event was shut down.

    Which, of course, is precisely what Milo wanted.    He sends people in to violate the rights of groups of protesters to assemble themselves, and when those people react, Milo acts like its his rights that are under attack.

    People should really stop focussing on Milo — he’s far more of a con man than he is anything else, getting rich off the stupidity of the white nationalist who now form the core of the GOP.   Once can even see Milo going the David Brock route, once this gig plays itself out.

    Instead, people should be focussing on groups like the UC Davis College Republicans, demanding that they answer for their tacit endorsement of a prominent white nationalist like Milo.    Why, of the thousands of people that the College Republicans could invite to campus, do they choose to invite someone guaranteed to create divisions on campus, and promote racism and hate?

        1. Ols Keith

          So what, cell phones have video cameras too.  What you’re doing here is trying to put the blame on MY and his people instead of blaming the people who actually shut down the speech, the student activists.

          1. Don Shor

            the people who actually shut down the speech, the student activists.

            It was the College Republicans that made the decision. So your statement is false.

      1. Tia Will

        Everyone is armed with cameras these days.”

        The issue is not whether or not everyone has a camera, but rather how they choose to employ them. Had Lt. Pike not been photographed directly pepper spraying peacefully seated protesters on the same campus 5+ years ago, this also might have been interpreted as a violent demonstration as MY is now attempting to portray.

         

    1. JosephBiello

      I gotta agree with Ols here, “armed with cameras”  is a silly characterization owing to what a camera does and their ubiquity.

      So many ideas now, e.g. could the campus have put a cordon farther from the building thereby allowing access?  Could there have been some way to ensure only UC Davis students came to the event and we, therefore, could understand how many of the protesters were actually UC Davis students and how many were provocateurs?

      Could we have had many cameras placed in that plaza that were on the whole time – prior to and during the shoving?  Cameras seem to get turned on after the incitement happens and thereby offer no evidence of the causes of the incitement.

      Regarding the College Republicans “answering” for their tacit support – now they have plausible deniability.  They can easily say, “we invited him to see what all the fuss was about, but never got to hear him.”

      TACTICS people… learn some better tactics!

       

       

       

       

      1. David Greenwald Post author

        “Regarding the College Republicans “answering” for their tacit support – now they have plausible deniability. They can easily say, “we invited him to see what all the fuss was about, but never got to hear him.””

        It’s important to understand that they made that call

  4. JosephBiello

    And now Milo gets to control the narrative, “There were reports of broken windows.”  We know there weren’t any broken windows, just a bit of shoving, but nobody can be sure about what “reports” made it to the organizers.  Now Milo gets to march to protest the shutting down of his free speech.

    And now we will hear nearly nothing about Kevin Samy’s speech on campus – you know, the one that was organized by the Dog Whistle project – attendance at which would have been the sober (and more challenging) protest to Milo’s presence.

    How  many times must the left fall into the same tactical trap before they realize it is a trap?

    [My one remaining hope is that this protest was actually a false flag operation.  The only victor I see coming out of the cancellation of this talk is Yannopoulis.]

     

     

     

     

  5. David Greenwald Post author

    Add one important point here – it was the college Republicans who decided to cancel the show.  There were no exterior arrests.  And the statements about property damage were proven false.

    1. Don Shor

      So he is a proven liar, and the College Republicans are completely responsible for the invitation and the cancellation. I urge those commenting here to stop blaming the students who protested the appearance and put the responsibility for this whole event squarely where it belongs.

      1. Colin Walsh

        I agree with Don. The College Republicans organized the event knowing their would be counter protests. Then when there are counter protests, they cancel the event and claim their right to free speech was violated, which is all they wanted to be able to claim in the first place. They set this up to get what they wanted from the beginning and I will not point fingers at the protesters for exercising their first amendment rights.

        I also agree with Sean Raycraft, the UCD College Republicans have a lot to answer for. This event didn’t just bring Milo the clown to campus, it also attracted White supremacy/ Neo Nazi leader Nathan Damingo of Identity Evropa. While he was not a featured speaker, he was photographed in front of the lecture hall. Is this really what UCD College Republicans want to bring to campus?

    2. Ols Keith

      Please, that will be the spin but it was the leftists who are against free speech who shut down the event.

      As you David wrote:

      “After consulting with UC Davis Police Department and UC Davis Student Affairs officials, the Davis College Republicans canceled tonight’s event featuring Breitbart columnist Milo Yiannopoulos. The decision was made at about 7:00 pm, 30 minutes prior to the scheduled start of the event, after a large number of protesters blocked access to the venue, and it was determined that it was no longer feasible to continue with the event safely.”

      After consulting with the UCDPD and Student Affairs it was no longer feasible to continue safely.  So who’s responsible for making it no longer safe?  Yes, make no mistake, it was the leftist activists that shut down the event.  Free speech as long as you say what they say is allowed.  Some free speech that is.

        1. Ols Keith

          So, if a leftist speaker was being protested by conservatives who were denying access to the event and things were getting out of hand and the police and college officials said it was no longer safe to continue you would blame to cancellation on the people who stopped the event for safety reasons and not the conservative protesters?

          I think we would be hearing a different tune in this very liberal town.

          1. Don Shor

            The College Republicans made the decision to cancel the event, so your repeated statements otherwise are false. I don’t want to engage in your hypotheticals. I am discussing the event as it happened according to what has been reported. The College Republicans are responsible for the event in the first place, and the College Republicans are responsible for canceling it. I urge you to acknowledge that and stop presenting a false narrative.

        2. Ols Keith

          Not a false narrative at all.

          That would be like saying it’s the airline’s fault that they cancelled a flight because of a a bomb scare.

          This is all nothing but spin, the leftist agitators indeed shut down this event.

          They shut down free speech … [moderator] edited

          1. Don Shor

            It is a false narrative that you have now put forth multiple times. There was no bomb scare. There is no spin. The decision was made by the College Republicans.

        3. JosephBiello

          Don – while I almost always agree with you, I think you and David are missing the bigger point.  Sure, it was the College Republicans who shut it down, but the narrative can always be spun to suggest they did so at the behest of the administration and police who would no longer be held accountable for any “violence”  (of which there was too little to enumerate).

          Provocation is about creating “visuals” and then generalizing from that visual to a narrative.   The faculty/student letter to campus asking for the event to be shut down created a bad visual which was followed up by a smattering of protesters and provocateurs.

          I’ve already got friends on the east coast and in England sharing the LA Times article about this with me.  People around the country are not going to make distinctions about “College Republicans” versus “UC Davis”.    And, while we may know what happened on January 13, 2017 – we will have no control of that narrative.

          ———-

          New headline, “Milo Chickened out of talk ’cause he couldn’t handle a few screaming kids”.  Spread that around to counter his narrative and then you might get people to listen.

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

          1. Don Shor

            The narrative can be spun by anyone in any manner. I suggest that when that is done, it be countered with the facts. It is being spun right here on the Vanguard.
            There is a real story here. A falsehood was immediately put forth about violence, one which was specific (hammers, broken windows). That was immediately picked up by Breitbart, of course; Mr. Yiannopoulos works for them. It has apparently been debunked. So who started that lie?

        4. JosephBiello

          Don, does it matter who started it?  What we knew for sure is that there would be a lie spun around this event.  It was predictable – it was, in fact, predicted.

          So the  narrative that should counter the alt-right narrative is that the College Republicans and the MY fans were cowards.  

           

        5. Ols Keith

          So the  narrative that should counter the alt-right narrative is that the College Republicans and the MY fans were cowards.  

          Or because the leftist agigtators were getting out of hand the college Republicans did the sensible thing to cancel the event at the request of the college and the UCDPD.

          It will be interesting when the videos surface showing the unruliness of the student agitators.

        6. Colin Walsh

          Milo was always going to put this spin on the event, he never should have been invited to the campus in the first place. Don’t buy into the lies about how dangerous it was on campus last night. The College Republicans have a lot to answer for.

        7. JosephBiello

          @Ols,  your right wing ideas so fragile that you must run from a bit of unruliness.

          Sadly, this is exactly what you and the right wing want.  A single coherent right wing discourse cannot be articulated so the right wing would much rather play the victim to some shouting kids.

          Milo and Martin were scared out of town by some shouting kids.  Will today’s Tule fog keep them away from their protest march?

           

        8. Howard P

          Semi-off topic… Republican does not equal “conservative”… Democrat does not equal “liberal”… think…

          I know of many Republicans who are social liberals/economic conservatives… many Democrats who are social conservatives/economic liberals… not to mention those who are mixed… many Catholics oppose birth control/abortion, yet also oppose the death penalty… many Republicans are generous in charitable giving,but oppose government spending practices…

    3. JosephBiello

      Yes, we can talk about the truth – but grainy video will be produced that will be used to refute the truth.

      ———

      I think we all should consider using the  Kelso choices when dealing with provocateurs/bullies:

      http://discovery.fifeschools.com/_/rsrc/1472858086637/resources/kelso-s-choices/kelso%20wjheel.jpg

       

      That, and the “selective deafness” that Ruth Bader Ginsburg said she used to get along with her late colleague Antonin Scalia.

      1. Tia Will

        Like the frog pics…..but what do you do if you are the adult, and the “bad” behavior is threats of rape, death to you and your family members tacitly supported ( by failure to disavow) by MY and his followers ? This is the behavior also tacitly supported by the Young Republicans when they knowingly invited MY to speak on campus. This was prior to any aggressive action by those on the left. So now, who really started the hate and violence and oppressive actions here ?  It doesn’t matter if you are on the right or the left, the fact that a hate monger for profit was invited to this campus by the Young Republicans is irrefutable. Everything else follows from that fact.

        1. JosephBiello

          @Tia, this is the problem of course – that there are THREATS (in the very abstract) of rape/death etc.  Moreover, Milo did not say anything specifically about rape, but was sly enough to egg on his followers to do so.

          The difference between your and my position is that you are equating violent words with violence.  I understand that those violent words increase the probability that some sociopath among Milo’s followers might actually perpetrate violence.  I get it.  I don’t want to see violence against anyone – even those with violent thoughts.   But, I also think that we are making a mistake by forcing this kind of speech underground.

          Yannopuolis et al. have been building a following online long before they had invitations to speak in lecture halls.   Speaking on campus (or better yet having that speech cancelled) is their performance for the cameras – gaining them more exposure to people who are not plumbing the depths of the alt-right internet.

          Personally, I’m disappointed that they weren’t allowed to speak (to a mostly empty lecture hall).  I was looking forward to reading a transcript of their talk and to either expose it as empty rhetoric, as vile incitement, or as badly formed ideas.

          Instead we are left with nothing but the show.   And Milo still doesn’t have to formulate a coherent idea in order to get publicity.

           

           

        2. Kendra Smith

          @JosephBiello:

          The GamerGate violence that was perpetuated by MY and others of his ilk did not just revolve around “violent words.” At the prompting of MY and his minions, several of the women were doxxed by these guys and their addresses and other personal information circulated on the Internet.

          At least one had men showing up at her house and trying to get into her house, and she spent the next several months couch surfing because she did not feel safe in her own home. I think this ceases to be an “abstract” when someone is in real danger.

          I do, however, think the decision to cancel the event was a mistake OR was already a plan by the College Republicans and MY to later whine about liberal intolerance.

          The sentiments expressed should have been roundly criticized and confronted by this community in a non-violent, although assertive, manner.

        3. JosephBiello

          @Tia, the frog pics are what’s taught in DJUSD for kids’ conflict resolution.

           

          @Kendra, two things.

          You  see that the damage of Milo and his ilk was done, online, long ago.  Shutting down speech in this forum won’t fix that damage, and nor will it prevent it from happening again.  Better yet that his speech see the light of day and be exposed for the toxin that it is.

          This whole thing was performance art by Milo/Martin.

          As for the gamergate and the woman/women it affected. It would seem that there should be laws about doxxing – though I have no idea how they’d be enforced. There are certainly laws against breaking and entering.

          I will never defend this guy and his ilk (I really don’t understand what happened in their childhood to make them so angry at the world). But I am convinced that we are giving him all the publicity he wants.

           

           

           

           

           

  6. Marina Kalugin

    it appears he is not as tough as he made out …..and the stupidest of the stupidest of the lowest level lame brains in this town and UCD and UC system got their way.. .

    oh well..  do I give a f… … .   nada..

    proves what I have only been talking about since I arrived here now less than at year ago..

    of course, Ruth was using selective deafness on Antonin?

    and she didn’t care about Clarence Thomas, one of the revolving Monsanto FDA attorneys, and on the Supreme court?

    as a jewish woman,  one would have expected her to not be happy with him either… ..  I mean after his behavior toward women and so on…..

    but I guess there is more to that story

    I never followed the money as to how she got where she is either. .

  7. Marina Kalugin

    Dr B.   yes, and until the TA/postdoc union started sitting in at LK’s office no one remembered the incident of 5 years ago … I mean the pepper spray. ….the five year contract was almost up..  and one of the guys who the DE interviewed is wtf?  how come no one remembers that..  well, it is because the incoming freshmen were only 12-13 when it happened..   and the union wanted to create a scene to get more money and better terms..  .

    and even many of the students attending ucd didn’t even know it happened. …those in STEM mostly didn’t have the time to watch TV or listen to the news etc….

    Well, that one guy and his cronies, got rid of the best chancellor we could hope to ever entice again……..

    In the meantime, only one truly in the know will know what happened….

    All college groups have to account for their money and their actions to their leaders on campus in Student Affairs,   if they are not compliant … they will get a 1) reprimand 2) a fine 3) losing their “independence” ie: have to get campus approval to sponsor any other future events.. .4) losing their student group status or worse..

    That is how certain fraternities were disbanded..

    Even if your superiors are on your side, the higher ups will tell ya.. go tell them to cancel or else..

    or one will be told ..  either graduate tomorrow or stop causing trouble.. .

    or  resign or retire now or something..    or ya may be put on probation..  I mean the group.. or on administrative leave  and after your long and truly illustrious career, ya wouldn’t want THAT would ya?

    Nada..  sometimes one makes choices only because there is not any choice left..

    Depending on other factors, there may or may not be class action law suits or union complaints filed..

    All depends.   🙂 at one true intentions are..

     

     

     

     

    1. Colin Walsh

      These videos do not show what you claim.

      The first video shows exactly what Paul Lukasiak described above. Milo’s provocateurs went into the crowd  to cause incidents and get the response on camera, that is exactly what is shown in this video.

      Your second video shows Martin Shkreli going up to the protesters after the College Republicans cancelled the speech, to cause more provocation – he even pushes a protester.

      Your third video shows protesters pushing and rattling barricades.

  8. Marina Kalugin

    False narratives are only shut down when the snubber is on the other side..

    I notice that those from other countries are not so easily shut up.. . and are much more easily able to debate without taking offense. .

    the ostrich folks, which are now mostly born and raised in the USA, are much more sensitive and more prone to remove that which they are not happy to see.

    [moderator] edited.

  9. Marina Kalugin

    thank goodness for utube.. did anyone get their names and statuses.. ie: student or not, union or not, which side of which fence.. ie:  did they vote for the HRC or the Donald.

    back in the 60s when one was arrested, not that I experienced that myself, questions were asked ant then when it was in the Chronicle or the other rag.   that kind of info would be in the paper.

    one would know if the person was a black panther or an Angela Davis follower..

    and so on..  real news in the real rags….

    and if the REAL news was not in those rags, the underground news would emerge. .

    it is always follow the money and learn the truth.. .in the media it is either get bought out or starve or die.. it is always a fine balance.

     

     

  10. Tia Will

    I think we would be hearing a different tune in this very liberal town”

    Maybe, but not from me. I believe in the rights of both  free speech and peaceful protest. I believe in the right of anyone ( KKK representative, MY, Westboro Baptist Church member, Marxist), repeat, anyone to come and speak peacefully.

    I also believe in the right of peaceful protest and gathering. I do not consider shouting, chanting and linked arms protest to constitute violence.

    The pushing and shoving that I have observed on the tapes to date are unacceptable and involved both sides ( opponents and proponents of the speech) as best as can be told from the limited clips available so far. I doubt that anyone will be able to prove definitively “who started it” with “it” being the actual physical contacts.

    What we do know for sure is what started the entire chain of events, and that was the invitation to MY to speak. For that, the responsibility lies entirely with the Republican student group. They were asked politely by a number of groups to rescind the invitation with reasons given and they declined. For that, they are fully responsible.

    1. Ols Keith

      They were asked politely by a number of groups to rescind the invitation with reasons given and they declined. For that, they are fully responsible.

      Did you watch the same videos I did?  Spitting in the cameraman’s face, kicking down barriers, shoving and taking a swing at one of the speakers, reports od UCDPD lives being threatened, etc.

      It was ugly.

      Here’s another video.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQx_JgxYzj4

      1. JosephBiello

        OMG, did you see that Ols… did you see that…… hundreds of people standing around a few of whom were shouting.  OMG soooooo unruly.

        OMG, one protester, smaller than Martin, pushed Martin back.

        OMG, one college Republican claimed that there were threats to the police and property (there were not).

        My point stands, the alt-right  is intellectually empty.  They are afraid of having to speak coherently for 1 continuous hour and would rather run away.

         

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FPELc1wEvk

      2. Tia Will

        Ols

        I was clearly addressing what happened prior to the event which you have not chosen to address or even acknowledge. Clearly none of this would have occurred had the Republicans not chosen to invite MY in the first place, or withdrawn the invitation once asked to do so.

        Like you, I find spitting and other acts of physical violence abhorrent.  I also find it abhorrent to deliberately create a situation in which such actions are encouraged as is done by those who would encourage “roughing up” folks who have differing opinions which is now apparently only sanctioned for one group on the political spectrum.

      3. Robert Canning

        Ols – I’m curious what you think of MY. Do you agree with his views?

        I’m not really interested in he-said/she-said back-and-forth, just curious of your views of the speaker.

        1. Ols Keith

          To be honest I had never heard of Milo before all of the commotion over him speaking at UCD.  I don’t believe Milo is a racist as has been put forward by many of the usual crowd who always shout racism when they don’t like what someone has to say.  I’ve asked many times for examples of Milo’s racism and to date nobody has come up with any solid evidence, just what others had written on his Twitter account or responses in his blog and they try and apply it to him.  He also states he’s not a member of the alt-right but that doesn’t seem to matter to the haters.  I don’t believe Milo is a homophobe either as he is gay himself.  I’ve watched a few Youtube events and some tv interviews and he hardly comes across as the hateful bigot that his detractors would have everyone believe.  They just don’t like it that he has the guts to state some inconvenient truths.   I don’t agree with everything Milo has to say but he’s not near the villian that the left has made hime out to be.  Either way he didn’t deserve to get shut down by the student agitators.  An ugly day for UC Davis and free speech.

        2. Colin Walsh

          Ols has publicly posted, “If you hate America enough to burn the flag, then leave,” on another website. I think that makes his advocacy for free speech here questionable.

        3. Ols Keith

          Once again David and the Vanguard.  Posts like Colin Walsh’s above just detract from anyone ever wanting to sign up for the Vanguard using their Facebook page.  What you end up with is not just discussion between individuals but people digging into your life using your FB page and using your name to surf the web.  I don’t think people want to deal with this just to comment on the Vanguard.

        4. Colin Walsh

          Ols Keith just does not want to be accountable for what he has posted in other places. It has nothing to do with the Vanguard log in system. I did a search online for “Ols Keith” and found that he had posted in other places. Ols just does not want to be accountable for his public posts.

          Ols, if you don’t want your facebook page to be public, then change the settings. Click on the little lock icon at the top right corner of the facebook page and change your settings

        5. Colin Walsh

          Ols, This is not about doing some deep dig into your life. You have publicly posted on another platform a post that shows you may not care as much about freedom of speech as you claim. Then you attack my freedom of speech suggesting that I should not be able to quote what you have publicly posted in other places. It seems increasingly clear that you are not committed to freedom of speech.

          Posting publicly on Facebook, is no different than writing a letter to the editor or posting on the Vanguard. It is public information.

        6. Ols Keith

          This just goes to show why an anonymous system is needed.  This proves what many of the former commenters that left and haven’t come back were afraid of.  People delving into their lives using their names and FB info.

        7. Colin Walsh

          Ols, No one is digging into anything private about you. You have chosen to post publicly on the internet, and it is very easy to find those postings. Please do not be surprised when people look at things you have publicly posted. if you don’t want people to look at your facebook page, then please change your facebook privacy settings. It is very simple to do and I would gladly help you change your settings if you want.

           

        8. Ols Keith

          Colin Walsh, I opined my views on here today just as you did but I didn’t do an Internet search using your name to see what I might be able to dig up on you.  When people have a discussion on a blog I don’t think they’re expecting to have other people searching the Internet about them or trying to access their Facebook page.  I personally find that distasteful and a good reason why the Vanguard should cease demanding people to use their Facebook account in order to comment.

        9. Colin Walsh

          You are taking a public position on a political blog about freedom of speech defending someone who attracted white supremacy/ Neo Nazi leader Nathan Damingo of Identity Evropa to Davis last night. Please do not be surprised that people are curious about who you are and what you stand for.

          It seems to me that what you actually find distasteful is being held accountable for your own public posts on the internet.

           

        10. Ols Keith

          So Milo is responsible for who decides to come and see him speak?  That’s the same as calling him a racist because someone wrote something racist on his blog.   If someone wrote something racist on the Vanguard would you call David a racist?  I think that’ s foolish.   If someone racist showed up to one of the Vanguard’s events would you also call David a racist because of that association?  That too is silly.  I find it interesting that you’re only investigating me when several others have posted on here today.  Is that because I’m a conservative?

        11. Howard P

          Colin… re: your 4:31 post…

          Maybe you are too young to remember… I remember vividly when the ACLU intervened to set aside an injunction preventing “nazi’s” from holding a march/rally in Skokie IL, where it was estimated that one of six residents were either Holocaust survivors or related to those who were… [actually tore up my ACLU membership card, and ceased my contributions to ACLU, which had been on-going for 5 years at that point]

          To assist you in understanding the rights of free speech and assembly, supported by SCoTUS, I offer,

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie

          At the time, I was incensed with the SCoTUS decision… over time, came to the conclusion that it was a “good call”, although I abhor Nazi/White Nationalist/etc. views.

          ACLU was conspicuously absent in this current case, and I fully expect that they will remain so… I believe they will “choose not to comment”… just like David said the host group has…

          There turned out to be no march in Skokie… perhaps the “thrill” was gone…

        12. Colin Walsh

          HP, seems like you have not read my posts very carefully. I am pointing out that Ols is not actually interested in protecting freedom of speech and is only arguing freedom of speech out of convenience. Ols is sad because he is being held accountable for his public writings on the internet.

  11. Tia Will

    Marina

    Dr. W..   get a f clue. .will ya?

    First, I dislike your use of the “f” as a substitute for a word that adds nothing to the conversation and only displays your own lack of facility in choosing a word that advances your point. Just thought that I would let you know so that you will know that in communicating with me, this usage does the opposite of strengthening your message. Obviously it is your right to use any term you like, even if it does undermine your point.

    As for my education, I see it quite differently. Having both graduated from two non STEM fields, and then spent the subsequent 30 years in STEM and STEM related fields, I believe that I learned important lessons from both. The most important being to never make the assumption that I am right simply because I believe something firmly. Open minded exploration of all of the evidence, not just that which supports my preconceived notion is the most important principle under which I operate. Show me the evidence and I will weigh it. Share your opinion, and I will consider it. Swear at me, and I am more likely to disregard what you have to say.

  12. Eric Gelber

    It was a win-win. Both sides got what they wanted: Protesters got the event cancelled. Milo and the alt-right got the kind of publicity money can’t buy. We’re about to enter an era in American history when freedom of expression, including freedom of the press, will be constantly under attack, where facts are irrelevant and lies are the norm. So, there were losers here: The principles of the open exchange of ideas and rational discourse, and thus, ultimately, all of us.

    1. Tia Will

      from how difficult it has been to spoonfeed you real truth over this not quite a year”

      Fine line between “spoon feeding” and “force feeding” that you do not seem to appreciate. MY and you certainly share one attribute. You seem to believe that being offensive and derogatory somehow adds to your points. It does not. In MY’s case, it is adding to his wealth. I am not sure what you are gaining from your offensive, and often incorrect posts. And if you are not “talking to me” I would appreciate it if you would leave my name out of it entirely especially when spouting pure speculation about my IQ, grades, or any other personal information about which it is you who are indeed “clueless”.

  13. Roberta Millstein

    So, I am a little stunned at all the people who defended Milo presenting on campus on the grounds of “free speech,” yet who criticize the protestors.  Freedom to protest is equally as important as freedom of speech – indeed, freedom to protest is a form of freedom of speech.  (That is, protest is a form of speech).  Many people said that Milo’s words should be condemned forcefully rather than silenced.  Well, OK, so people showed up last night to do just that.  Why the double standard in defending Milo but not defending the protestors?

    1. Ols Keith

      Ummm, the protesters were there to shut him down.  There were lines stopping the speakers and the guests who wanted to see him from entering.  This was way over the top and a lot more than just peacefully protesting MY’s speech.

      1. Marina Kalugin

        so why were not all the cops out in uniform from the whole county and adjacent counties… .as often at the pavilion for a concert

        or on campus on black family days?

        ..   why wasn’t the tank there also?

        buncha num nums..

         

      2. Roberta Millstein

        So, it’s OK for Milo to say things like “there should be limits on the percentages of women accepted into the sciences” (limiting their education and future careers), but it’s not OK for protestors to say “I condemn this speech and don’t think it should be uttered”?  As for it being “way over the top,” that’s your spin and perception, not shared by many.

      3. Colin Walsh

        There were lines stopping the speakers and the guests who wanted to see him from entering.  – OLS Keith

        Ols, you your self posted a this video link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOMwxA4jzwA  of Martin Schkreli, one of the the speakers, come out from the venue to provoke the crowd, and then go back into the venue. That clearly shows that the speakers were able to enter the building.

    2. Howard P

      ‘Disproportionate’ “speech”?  “Speech” designed to drown out other “speech”? Slogan chants, led by ‘cheerleaders’ with bullhorns, vs  discussion, with point/counterpoint?  Don’t think the founding fathers were thinking to support “Hey hey, ho ho, the British king will have to go”, repeated for hours at a time… I could be wrong, ‘tho…

      The “f-bomb” was thrown into the mix several times, and everyone on one ‘side’ joined in the chant… ah, yes, “freedom of speech”, like all freedoms, are subject to ‘time, place, manner’.  In my opinion, one of those tenets were violated last night… to the detriment of meaningful speech… and meaningful ‘counter-speech’… football didn’t move a micron.

      Ironically, the misuse, intemperate use of free speech, is perhaps, free speech’s greatest threat… it tends to galvanize those who would suppress voices differing in opinion, logic, or justice from their own values…

      We’ve seen that reaction before, particularly in the 20th century… pick your venue…

       

      1. Tia Will

        from how difficult it has been to spoonfeed you real truth over this not quite a year”

        Fine line between “spoon feeding” and “force feeding” that you do not seem to appreciate. MY and you certainly share one attribute. You seem to believe that being offensive and derogatory somehow adds to your points. It does not. In MY’s case, it is adding to his wealth. I am not sure what you are gaining from your offensive, and often incorrect posts. And if you are not “talking to me” I would appreciate it if you would leave my name out of it entirely especially when spouting pure speculation about my IQ, grades, or any other personal information about which it is you who are indeed “clueless”.

      2. Tia Will

        Howard

        Don’t think the founding fathers were thinking to support “Hey hey, ho ho, the British king will have to go”, repeated for hours at a time… I could be wrong, ‘tho…”

        Actually some of them ended up supporting far more violent action than a few “hey,hey, ho, ho’s”. If I recall correctly they sanctioned destruction of property, and ultimately rebellion when their demands were not met. Not saying I would or would not have agreed, just saying that our founders were not above violent action in what they believed to be a just cause.

      3. Roberta Millstein

        ‘Disproportionate’ “speech”?  “Speech” designed to drown out other “speech”? Slogan chants, led by ‘cheerleaders’ with bullhorns, vs  discussion, with point/counterpoint?  Don’t think the founding fathers were thinking to support “Hey hey, ho ho, the British king will have to go”, repeated for hours at a time… I could be wrong, ‘tho…

        No one seemed to want to put any limits on what Milo could say or to consider what counted as good speech or thoughtful speech or useful speech or true speech – but you want to put limits on what the protestors could say?  Again, I see a double standard.

        1. Howard P

          No double standard here…  feel free to interpret/twist words of others… it’s your right…

          I can guess why you have problems with the term “manner”… but I won’t.

        2. Roberta Millstein

          No double standard here…  feel free to interpret/twist words of others… it’s your right…

          I can guess why you have problems with the term “manner”… but I won’t.

          Which of your words do you feel that I have twisted?  That was certainly never my intent.

          If you want to talk about manner rather than content, I think you if you watch some of the videos of MY you will see that his manner is nothing to defend.  See, e.g., this video, starting at around 2 minutes 30 seconds:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifnl1hNPlX4

          In what way is his “manner” superior to that of chanting protestors?

        3. Howard P

          If there is a double standard, it might be that the ACLU did not seem to be concerned….

          As to manner… have seen or heard nothing about the jerk’s previous ‘presentations’ that effectively silenced opposition voices…

           

        4. Roberta Millstein

          If there is a double standard, it might be that the ACLU did not seem to be concerned….

          Well, the event was supposed to proceed as planned.  I don’t imagine that the ACLU is composed of mind-readers who knew that the event would be cancelled.

          As to manner… have seen or heard nothing about the jerk’s previous ‘presentations’ that effectively silenced opposition voices…

          Well, he has frequently talked over them, e.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBiS4qTsjCg

          One might argue that that is equivalent to chanting over someone.

          And again, as many others have said on this page, it was the Davis College Republicans who decided to cancel the event.

        5. Howard P

          Roberta…

           it was the Davis College Republicans who decided to cancel the event.

          True, to a point… yet, context is everything… from the article…

          “After consulting with UC Davis Police Department and UC Davis Student Affairs officials, the Davis College Republicans canceled …”

          Are you a parent?  Have you ever advised your children as to what the “logical consequences” would be if they continued to acting in a way they ‘intended’?  I have no clue what that “consulting” consisted of… I know that children take clues from parents when they lay out ‘logical consequences’… not coercion per se, but…

          Look at the longer videos… the protesters who crossed the barriers, arguably seeking a confrontation/arrests…  the size of the crowd… the prevalence of those chanting f-bomb phrases… do you truly believe that had the doors been opened, on schedule, and the ticketed folk going thru the doors, that everything would have been fine?  Really?  Perhaps the hosts should have shown a pair, insisted on proceeding, then demanding police protection… we’ll never know how that might have turned out… I’m guessing it would not have turned out as well as it did.

          You talk about “manner’ and question why the speaker and protesters differed… the speaker might have (we won’t know) advocated for deportation of undocumented aliens… many of the protesters signs called for deportation of ‘racists’ and ‘fascists’ [probably as they would judge those] even for those, arguably, can trace their citizenship back 150 years.  Yet you equate the two.  Je ne comprends pas… but then again, am only a stupid STEM grad…

        6. Roberta Millstein

          True, to a point… yet, context is everything… from the article…

          “After consulting with UC Davis Police Department and UC Davis Student Affairs officials, the Davis College Republicans canceled …”

          Are you a parent?

          No.

          Have you ever advised your children as to what the “logical consequences” would be if they continued to acting in a way they ‘intended’?  I have no clue what that “consulting” consisted of… I know that children take clues from parents when they lay out ‘logical consequences’… not coercion per se, but…

           

          Right, you have no clue what the consulting consisted of, so you cannot draw any inferences from it.  And UC Davis Police Department and UC Davis Student Affairs do not have any power over this student group.  Also remember that this is the group who has steadfastly refused to change their decision to invite MY after months of objections, letters, insults, etc.  They do not seem easily cowed or coerced.

          If you were to ask me why the event was cancelled, my answer would be, “I have no idea.”  I don’t speculate about events in the absence of information.

          Look at the longer videos… the protesters who crossed the barriers, arguably seeking a confrontation/arrests…  the size of the crowd… the prevalence of those chanting f-bomb phrases… do you truly believe that had the doors been opened, on schedule, and the ticketed folk going thru the doors, that everything would have been fine?  Really?

          Really.  I have seen only peaceful protests on the videos. (Although I did see Milo’s compatriot, Martin Shkreli, shoving a protestor – after, mind you, this oh-so-dangerous event was cancelled).  Yes, f-bombs.  But f-bombs are not violent.  That’s part of that “free speech” that so many on this blog have defended as an absolute right.

          You talk about “manner’ and question why the speaker and protesters differed…

          You brought up manner, not me.  In fact, you chastised me for not considering “manner” and asked me to show how their manner was similar, which I did. But now you seem to switch back to content:

          the speaker might have (we won’t know) advocated for deportation of undocumented aliens… many of the protesters signs called for deportation of ‘racists’ and ‘fascists’ [probably as they would judge those] even for those, arguably, can trace their citizenship back 150 years.  Yet you equate the two.  Je ne comprends pas… but then again, am only a stupid STEM grad…

          I have trouble following what you are trying to say here.  So, I will just reiterate my initial and main point, which I stand by, which was not to equate Milo with the protestors (??) but rather to ask why it was that some people here seem to support the right to free speech but not the right to protest.
           

          Oh, Roberta… we’ll never know if the jerk speaker would have ‘over-talked’ those present, will we?

          Right.  But you were the one who said that you “have seen or heard nothing about the jerk’s previous ‘presentations’ that effectively silenced opposition voices.”  So, I gave evidence that in fact, he had.  I was simply countering your point.

  14. Howard P

    A thousand people in the streetChanting slogans and carrying signsMostly say, hooray for our side

    Paraphrased from one of my favorite songs…

    Look at several of the “discussion”/”counterpoints” above… too bad no one seems much interested in actually ‘moving the football’…

    In several, one person says something to provoke another, and succeeds… setting up a new provocation… perhaps a microcosm of what occurred yesterday evening?

    A lot of  “trash-talking” last night… under the guise of ‘free speech’ and/or ‘righteous indignation’… the football never moved from the previous “point of the spot”…

    Have fun, folk… am taking Jerry’s sage advice from last night… ‘it’s not worth it”.  The speaker was not worth it… arguing over who cancelled the event is not worth it… but, have at it…

     

  15. Tia Will

    JB

    this is the problem of course – that there are THREATS (in the very abstract) of rape/death etc.  Moreover, Milo did not say anything specifically about rape, but was sly enough to egg on his followers to do so.”

    I confess to being very sensitive to this issue based on my profession. An initial threat may seem to be very abstract and still have lethal consequences. This hits a very sensitive spot for me.

    In the United States, violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least eleven people, including four doctors, two clinic employees, a security guard, a police officer, two people (unclear of their connection), and a clinic escort; [I 1] [I 2″ Reference from Wikipedia.

    Those who preach that doctors providing legal medical care are “baby killers” do not accept any responsibility for their actions when someone decides to “save the babies” by killing doctors, their staff members and sometimes innocent bystanders in what amount to terrorist attacks based on a religious belief. We are quick to demonize those killing in the name of Islam, but find ways to excuse or minimize the same actions performed by those acting in the name of Christianity.

    I believe that MY is indeed a coward. If this is not true, then he should be willing to accept full responsibility for any violence that occurs as an outcome of the blatant hate speech from which he profits.

    1. Marina Kalugin

      perhaps the DV will invite him to post his talk..

      but as you may have noticed when Dhavie posts it gets taken done as soon as I ask a question….

      likely the same thing will happen with MY..

      1. Tia Will

        perhaps the DV will invite him to post his talk”

        Can’t speak for David whose sole decision this is, however, I would love to read or hear what MY actually had to say. I am not holding my breath that he would do this since it would lose a great deal of its theatrical value which I am sure is much of what is driving the real value to MY, namely money. Remember the imprecation to “follow the money…?”

        Also bear in mind that the campus Republicans chose to remain silent when David solicited their thoughts on the matter to be reported on the Vanguard.

        1. Howard P

           the campus Republicans chose to remain silent when David solicited their thoughts on the matter to be reported on the Vanguard.

          Did they?  At what hour did David solicit their thoughts? What medium?  How many contacts were made [note that David did not mention frequency, or any of the other elements]?

          Suspect many of them, coming off an emotional Friday night possibly ‘well-lubricated’ staggered out of bed long after David posted the article… find it hard to believe they were monitoring communications, waiting to hear from the prestigious VG.

          Or perhaps I should ask you for comment, at 1:30 in the AM, texting you, and if you hadn’t responded by  5 AM, I could rightfully claim that you ‘chose to remain silent’.

          C’mon…

  16. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

    Marina

    Spicuzza did not give the order to spray . We don’t exactly  where from the order came to orchestrate the pepper spray provocation because the case was quickly settled in the federal court.  UC Davis Campus Counsel Steven Drown advised Pike to spray protesters an assured him that would be no legal consequences of his action .

    1. Marina Kalugin

      uhhhhh.. Jerry, LK did NOT> . .I know Steve Drown, truly an appropo name for a not quite sharp publich u attorney. The woman he replaces was WAY sharper.  but however, he was good enough for a few cases which came up in the last decade…

      Is  Steven still on campus or did HE get a promotion elsewhere also?  like the UCOP or out of state?

      Remember the LK new daughter-in-law I, and the MSO at that dept, had hired as an undergrad advisor around 2 decades ago. ..I tend to know people and know things.

      Since 1970.  hehe

  17. Alan Miller

    Was commenting last night on an article that the Vanguard pulled.  Got in at 4:00am, so now that I’m 82nd in line, here’s my last comments from the vanished thread:

    ReplyReport comment ↓

    Alan Miller January 13, 2017 at 10:49 pm
    Why did this article vanish from the list of articles today?
    I am liking Hexter’s take on this:

    The school’s interim chancellor, Ralph Hexter, said he was “deeply disappointed” by the protests and cancellation.  “Our community is founded on principles of respect for all views, even those that we personally find repellent,” Hexter said after the cancellation. “As I have stated repeatedly, a university is at its best when it listens to and critically engages opposing views, especially ones that many of us find upsetting or even offensive.”

    Disgusted by the protestors.  Not for being there, for shutting it down.  Fools.  You played right into his hands, and you don’t even know it.

      1. Howard P

        nah… fascism is really something only ‘the State’ can do, or at least folk with real power… if you meant ‘fascist-like wannabes’, not sure I’d agree, but I wouldn’t quibble.  Which would be a great irony… to use ‘fascist’ tactics while protesting ‘fascism’?  Delicious… at least the “chrystalnicht” rumor was not true…

        Oh, and “leftist” is probably the wrong term… the speaker would offend many on the right, as well, if they are part of classes of folk he targets…

        1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

          Howard

          Well stated .  I was ready to respond to the  Ols’  post with the same thoughts . Fascism has nothing to do with left . Milo is provocative and  offensive  political charged  clown and he is making his  living this way.  He has no his comedy  show yet on the late night TV than he is  using what he can to make money .  I don’t see that his carrier will last long .

        2. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

          Ols

          This is fascism . This is a political correctness and is here for long time .  I don’t know who you are but I don’t understand your view on  the Milo clowning around and provoking people  if you are the true Republican . Come on Ols.

        3. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

          Do they get shut down by conservatives?

          Ols

          This  is the  difference between  conservatives and  left.  You have to learn what the conservatism stands for .  Conservatism is not about the  provocateurs and clowns like Milo.

      2. Eric Gelber

        Ols quoted: “America is facing a new fascism that does not tolerate any views it doesn’t like — where “wrong” speech is being hounded, demonized and shouted down.”

        Agree. We’ve seen a lot of that from the President Elect during the campaign and afterwards. Within the last week we’ve had Meryl Streep being demonized and CNN being shouted down and excluded from participating in a news conference. Given the source, this is far more disturbing than any group of local protesters.

        1. Ols Keith

          This is just deflection.  Did Meryl Streep get shut down or was she allowed to deliver her diatribe?  Milo got shut down.

          I will say this Eric Gelber, at least you were for letting Milo speak which I agreed with you.

        2. Ols Keith

          Jim Acosta was rude and tried to talk over the President.  Can’t imagine the demonization if a reporter had tried those tactics with Obama.  Yes Meryl Streep has her detractors, but she got to speak.  Milo didn’t.

    1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

      Alan

      Hexter is not deeply disappointed , he is relieved that the Milo’s event ended this way. What he had stated is the  UC  policy which he has to follow.  Nothing else .

  18. Marina Kalugin

    I see a lot of my posts or at least a few are still awaiting moderation. . .while the many posts of Dr. M are gone..  does that mean she chose to ignore me?

    I know that due to the five minute edit window she could not have gone back and removed all of those comments.   hours later

    Just trying to understand how this all works.   I had actually found Dr. M to be a very very sane voice on the DV for some months now…..

    1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

      now that Mein kempf is now no longer banned in Germany many of my USA jewish friends are reading it for the first time.

      Marina

      What your Jewish friends are  trying to learn from the  Mein Kampf?  You have good sense of humor.

      HH

  19. Marina Kalugin

    now that Mein kempf is now no longer banned in Germany many of my USA jewish friends are reading it for the first time.

    A good friend of mine, who used to volunteer for wikileaks and whom I had “met” over some anonymous protests on line. . recently told me that he has left the anonymice as many of the guys from the EU are now bowing to Hitler. .  the Germans, Austrians and those from Switzerland are not so happy to be overrun by Syrians…

    neither are my pals from Sardinia and France..

    have you seen the pictures ourside the Eiffel tower and Champs Elysee recently?

    so over the many months now..   I used to repeat..  Follow the money and learn the truth…

    and also, the truth ain’t what you think it is

    and because of the nonstop USA inside jobs blames on others from the early 60s and likely earlier.

    history repeats itself unless one is not too stupid to learn from it…

    Now, class?   are you are, or at least some of ya, getting a f clue?   I doubt it..

     

     

  20. Tia Will

    Jerry

    I think your question misses the mark, but I will respond. The answer is “no”. If I were the owner of an amphitheater, I would not hold an event for Milo there. I would also not rent to anyone who uses obscenities or calls names regardless of their political philosophy. I dislike these behaviors and do not associate with those who use them. However, this situation is quite different. If I were the sole owner of the amphitheater, the control of the space would be up to me.  That is not a “free speech” issue. It is an issue of my right  to use my property in a manner consistent with my values.

    I have already stated repeatedly that I believe that Milo should have been allowed to speak at UCD at the invitation of the Republican group. I fail to see why it is any more important to you if I would rent a property that I owned to him than it would be if I would invite him to my home. The answer to that is also “no”.

    1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

      Tia

      If I were the owner of an amphitheater and I see the good profit from the event than I will let him speak . However ,  if the event would not cause to burn my place to the ground . Public school supported by the  tax payers money . No. The University of California is not the Westboro Babtist Church.  

      http://www.godhatesfags.com/

      1. Howard P

        You raise an interesting couple of points… should the host group be responsible for all the overtime security required for the event?  Should the host group provide full liability insurance, naming the campus as additional insured and indemnify and hold the campus harmless?

        In the real world, those would be standard for a private venue… and many public ones…

  21. Tia Will

    Jerry

    If I were the owner of an amphitheater and I see the good profit from the event than I will let him speak . “

    And in a society which values both free speech and the ability to control your own business interests, this is an entirely reasonable choice if your highest value is how much money you can make. This is not my highest value.

    I would gladly give up any proceeds from a speech by MY rather than provide him with a venue for his lies, hatred and provocation. I also would not accept advertisements from tobacco, fast food, pharmaceutical companies, gun manufacturers, and any number of businesses that I see as profiting off the misfortunes and or promoting the illness of others.

    1. Ols Keith

      Then you must feel for the couple in Gresham Oregon who refused to provide a cake for a gay wedding because of their religous beliefs and ended up having to close their business.

      1. Tia Will

        Ols

        Then you must feel for the couple …..” 

        I “feel” for anyone whose business is destroyed. However, I do not believe in discrimination against gays any more than I believe in discrimination based on gender, or race, or religion. I believe I was clear in stating that I would not rent my facility to anyone who uses profanity, engages in hate speech, or promotes discrimination hate or violence regardless of their political stance. This is not discriminatory since it treats all the same. I suppose that that might also put me out of business, but then there are many ways to go out of business and discrimination is only one of them.

        1. Don Shor

          Actually, they chose to make it a home business instead of a storefront business, and they’ve raised half a million dollars online via gofundme and continuetogive.

    2. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

      I have already stated repeatedly that I believe that Milo should have been allowed to speak at UCD

      Tia

      Place like  the UCD is a real damage and you are saying ” Milo , go for , welcome , pleasure to have you ” Our kids love you . ” . Private property  is a completely different matter  where you have a  contract and you can set the condition how the event should be handled .

      1. Tia Will

        Jerry

        I agree that private property is a different matter. That was the point of my response to you.

        “you are saying ” Milo , go for , welcome , pleasure to have you ” Our kids love you . ”

        As for the quoted statement, I have no idea what you are talking about since I have never said anything of the sort.

        1. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

          Tia

          You implied but this is not important . I am not accusing you of anything. This is just a chat .  I don’t care about this guy . His event was canceled not because of the left or right The decades  of the political correctness surfaced and told Milo “shut up.”

    1. Howard P

      Not sure I fully understand your point, but one of the pics (your posted cite, Jerry) reminded me of something else I noticed at the ‘protest’… significant # of folk who wore bandanas across their faces to obscure their identity… wonder why… perhaps they know that “what is posted on the internet stays on the internet”?  I understand that now potential employers search facebook/internet as part of their “vetting” process for new hires, etc.  As Yul Brynner’s character said, “it is a puzzlement”…

      1. Tia Will

        Howard

        Obviously I am speculating, but based on the previous use of social media and the internet by MY and his supporters, I can think of a more direct reason for wanting to hide one’s identity than potential job opportunities. One of my major objections to MY is his use of the internet to call out individuals who were then subjected to direct and sometimes dangerous threats and actions by his followers as what happened with gamergate and Leslie Jones. I think it would have been at least reasonable for people to want to protect their identity based on his past actions.

        1. Howard P

          Did you read the Bee article yesterday about ‘Familytreenow.com’?  Reminds me of a line used twice in “Twilight Zone: the Movie”…”do you want to see something REALLY scary?”

          BTW, was not criticizing the use of bandanas, per se, but please note:

          Pretty much all those wearing them were male; some people act differently when under the guise of anonymity (hence the VG policy change?); some would not feel safe to “speak out” (the corollary?)… the reason I used one of David’s options; you said,

           I think it would have been at least reasonable for people to want to protect their identity based on his past actions.  

          I believe I understand your point, but will take a minor [but important] disagreement with your use of the pronoun… the jerk is a wimp, no matter how how flamboyantly he pretends to be a ‘leader’… those who did the anti-social things, that you seem to attribute to the jerk’s “actions”, were already “primed” to “act out”… just like the Columbine kids; just like the Aurora guy; just like the Sandy Hook guy; just like the Orlando guy (night club, not the current troll); the Charleston guy… etc., etc., etc.

          The jerk is pretty incapable of “inflaming”… he does provide an ‘excuse’ perhaps to some… from what David reported, he is far less dangerous than the prez-elect, and I consider him pretty impotent as well… there is an old saw… “a leader sees where folk are going, then pushes and shoves to get to the head of the line, to pretend he is leading them.”

          One of my major objections to MY is his use of the internet to call out individuals

          Kinda’ like DV posters have done, on City staff in the past?

          Am not fundamentally disagreeing, more about nuance/degree…

           

  22. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

    Howard

    This is the  DavisVanguard’s tweet  photo and I am on Twitter. This is  my sarcastic comment about protesters .  You should join  Twitter. You no need to use your own name after registration and you could block anybody you don’t like to see. Lot of the  good information on Twitter which  you don’t have on other social media.  Tweets are  very short .

    1. Howard P

      Will have to have my 30-something son(s) advise me… don’t know really what it [twitter] is (except for the president-elect using it heavily), and do not have a “smart phone”… thx for the suggestion, tho’…

  23. Jaroslaw Waszczuk

    Howard

    You no need smartphone just computer as you have now . You are  a smart guy and your tweets will get lot of attention.  You have  great response skill needed for short tweets . Tweet as same as post on DV but very short. .  You could paste photo etc . You will have more fun than on DV with out getting excited .  your son is 30 + like mine.  I could teach twitter . Is not much to learn there .  Few minutes . You could tweet to your favor politicians or these you don’t like etc . Everybody on the Tweeter .

    Have  a good night .

  24. Marina Kalugin

    though a techie from before the days that word came about..   there is a reason I didn’t get a smart phone until just over a year ago…

    perhaps it is the same with hp?  as far as twitter it is a skill and an  art I haven’t perfected yet..  when there is oohhhhhhh so much to share..

    I see this is going on and on and on. .  .on travel days nada have time for real work to get to the  DV where I mostly play and tweak others or share truth only to have it snubbed away…

    twitter is the voice of the young millenials and gen X..  and the older folks who are trying to get IN with the in crowd.  aka the Donald.

    I got so lost that I thought Dr. M had some things removed or put me on ignore.   frankly as an activist since childhood.   ya know you are getting through when some ignore or unfriend.. those folks are not the ones you want to get to.. the silent majority is who is still there listening.. or so one hopes.

    One of my dearest pals posted THE funniest things on his FB wall and I just saw it and reposted  to mine.

    About the REAL reason that the event was cancelled..

    Hope you all already saw it..  Cause I do not have time to get through all the posts since I signed off last night.

    PS>  The twitter generation?   uggghghgh.. the common core educated, who cannot give change or do much except play video games and text 24/7..  ..if they cannot get it in a sec, it is not worth their time….and on and on. ..   ps.  do ya, any of ya, here think it is the Donald or the LK or the Napo doing all those tweets?

    really..  I believe the JW is ..  beyond that.. not likely …

    It is a TEAM of very, very highly paid folks who are trained to think, act and speak and sound like the celebs..

    The individuals on the team have to be very sharp as a screwup of the wrong kind can cost their boss their job in seconds.. and thus the team member’s job is always on the line…. because it could cost the position, the job, the status of the “boss”.   or an election and so on…

     

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for