QuickDreck- Minuteman Hatemail

Written by

Over the past several days, the Bwog has recieved a steady stream of drivel decrying the Minuteman protest. In the interest of depicting what kind of statements are coming out of a particular subset of American society today, we’ve reprinted a few of them. The really long ones have been cut down a bit, but otherwise they’re posted as written.  

Communist? We Prefer Anarcho-Fascist

I am exercising my first amendment right to blast you for your riot against the guest speakers invited to your university. Since the administration at your college is too chicken chit to have a “contact us” tab on the Columbia web site..this blog is all I could find to respond to. 98% of American citizens are against illegal immigration. It is causing a burden on our social programs (of which I am quite sure most of your minority students need) and also causing diseases and urban sprawl. We are NOT for it..and we applaud the Minutemen Project and also The Minutemen Civil Defense Corps. Did your parents raise you with any sort of good values? Obviously not. I realize you are young..and will do idiotic things for awhile…but whoever was involved in the riot should be expelled from the university. I would not donate one thin penny to that college until all the participants of the riot are expelled. Now, if you can’t behave yourselves and get the education that the taxpayers are probably footing the bill for, pell grants etc…then perhaps you should leave college and join the military and do something productive for you country. If this is the sort of citizens Columbia University is turning out..perhaps someone in New York should shut it down. Shame on all of you who participated in the insanity..and shame on those of you who condone such piss poor behavior. Dig? (feel free to print this on your communist blog)


Only Thugs Need Apply

Congratulations! It’s lovely seeing such tolerance and intellectual

curiosity displayed at one of America’s top universities. No doubt,

your wonderfully politically correct ADMISSIONS POLICIES have

contributed to your preeminence. Perhaps you can formally

institutionalize some prerequisites….e.g.: Required: Anarchists

and Anti American Thugs Only need apply.

University/college attendance used to be a privilege attained by hard

work and achievement. NOW, all you have to do is be an “ethnic” of

any sort except those representing Western Civilization, or be an



An Oxymoron of the First Order

…The problem Americans are facing is one of ILLEGAL INVADERS, not immigrants — brought about by total neglect of the U.S. government to protect our Borders throughout several decades, both by Democratic and Republican administrations…When our Politicians that think our Constitution is just a damn piece of Paper & Laws are meant to be broken then we are headed down the Slippery Slope of Anarchy!

…They retain loyally to the Native Countries & Exploit the Compassion of Americans & the Corruption of our Politicians by using us & having nothing but contempt for a people & Nation that does not have the Political Will or Integrity in its Politicians to enforce our Laws & our Constitution against Invasion.

To put it bluntly & without being Politically Correct, Illegal Aliens & Many of our Politicians are Parasites & Criminals feasting on the backs of American Citizens!

Illegal Aliens seek not to build this Nation, but to use the fruits of Labor of Legal American Citizens that immigrated to this country legally & have in 230 years of Blood, Sweat, Tears, and Sacrifice built this Nation!

While the Illegal Invaders have built nothing but a Cesspool of Crime, Corruption, Poverty & Misery in their own Counties for the masses, but a Elite class of very Rich, and Corrupt for the few.

Could this be what many of our Politicians are hoping to Achieve here in the USA?

You hear our Politicians like Bush, Kennedy, Hillary, McCain, Reid, Spector, Brownback, Martinez, that’s wants to give them Amnesty, only they are so dishonest they refuse to call it Amnesty! They talk about the Rule of Law & Amnesty in the same sentence. This is an Oxymoron of the first order!…

This Nation will be inundated with 10,s of Millions of Prolific breeders. Citizens with an average of 6 grade education and a 50 percent school drop out rate to populate the gangs & welfare rolls…

Many Nations have tried to build a great Nation on the Back of Slaves, all have failed. If this were not so Mexico & other third world Nations would be rich instead of poor!


A New Threat to National Parks

Columbia Students:

What a sad group of individuals who call themselves Americans but have no

tolerance for the opinions of anyone who differs from their own. I had always

been under the impression that Columbia University was above all of this and

defended free speech but I stand corrected.

If any group has the right to discuss the illegal immigration issue its the

members of the Minutemen who many of them live on or near the border with

Mexico and see their property destroyed or stolen on a daily basis by illegal

invaders from Mexico. Those of us who live in Texas, Arizona and California see

the damage done to our cities, farms and ranches, national parks and to the

environment by the influx of illegal migrants flowing across the border every

day. They break into our homes, steal our property, fill our jails, destroy

crops and kill livestock and dump hundreds of thousands of pounds of garbage

and human wastes everywhere they roam. The’ve even been caught numerous

times using our National Parks for large dope farming operations. So if anyone

shouldn’t have the right to discuss this issue it’s you rich, white, left-wing

Ivy League punks that have no idea about what going on in the real world.

Regardless you wouldn’t see us preventing you from speaking on the issue

because of your right to free speech found in the US Constitution, unlike you

preventing the Minutemen from expressing their opinion. Either you support the

whole Constitution or not, its that simple; you can’t pick and choose.


Outright Hatespeech

I am a Californian

I am laughing at the students who protested

you guys out there should be ashamed….

you know nothing about the illegal problem

I have it first hand out here.

I see contractors hiring illegal’s and using them for cheap labor

(thats slavory, and it drives the construction workers pay rate way down)

i see cheap ass american’s hiring them to do their lawns and their dirty work

cause their kids are fat and lazy, and wont do “That kind of work”

Now i see your school’s Hippies and dirt bags that think they know whats going on

charge and threaten a TRUE AMERICAN

















And then, when we wrote a brief note back, he replied:

yaya i miss spelled maybe 2 words

but that dsnt mean you guys are still not idiots!

i wrote that out of spite and anger and my call still goes

if any of your hippie commie friends come out here

I will kick the snot out of them!

remeber me and my name kid

cause when the war does come

commies and traitors will be hung by the neck



Nerdy Nazis on Parade

Nazis you love to hate.

What nerds.

Can’t wait until your kids throw tantrums for you….!

Asian against Illegal Immigration and a Taxpayer


From a neo-Nazi, expressing his confusion over the media’s representation of the fracas:

“I thought these people were jew and negro loving liberals. Was this just a typical spin from the media?” 


Columbia: A Real Treasure!

How typical of our communist “elite” academia… Don’t debate the issue rationally, just resort to snide, elitist attacks. Thanks for, once again, showing the level of decline in intelligent discussion at our Marxist education centers. Now the secular progressives, like the Nazis, are resorting to actual pysical assaults and violence to stifle true debate. A real treasure, that Columbia! Hope you aren’t too wrapped up in your postmodern drivel to understand sarcasm. I am going to save your responses, and I am going to do some major complaining to Columbia’s leaders and to my Congressmen. It’s time for Americans to rise up and say enough is enough. These people behind that “protest” are mostly a motley stew of Marxists, anarchists, and radical “chicano” groups determined to wage war on our society any way they can, from rewriting history to overthrowing capitalism and installing a Marxist utopia in the U.S. How insane is it to support an ideology that resulted in the bloody murder of 100 million people? The ideas espoused by our “academia” are intended to recruit young people into the left wing side of the culture war-which most Americans disagree with. I think this adds pefectly to what David Harowitz has been working for, and I intend to help in any way I can. Your “university” should be ashamed, and should be brought to justice and the officers who stood by and did nothing while those people infringed on the rights of the speakers should be fired.

PS-Keep clinging to your Marxist “No one is ever illegal” jargon, keep letting unfettered illegals from the Arab world in, and maybe your awful university will be next on their list.


We Beg To Differ

DISGRACEFUL, DISGUSTING, what Columbia University did to  representatives of

the Minutemen who you invited to speak at your  college.  

And you call yourself an institution for higher education? When you deny  

First Amendment Rights you expose yourselves to be a hateful racist  university

run by extreme radical liberals and communists. At least you  displayed to

millions of Americans what is in store for our country should  the extreme left

seize political power.  

There isn’t any difference between the students at Columbia and the  Ku Klux

Klan of 50 years ago.

Edit: This Just In-

Subject: terrorists

your worse then the mooselums who flew the planes into the buildings

Tags: , ,


  1. wow  

    "Since the administration at your college is too chicken chit to have a "contact us" tab on the Columbia web site..this blog is all I could find to respond to."

    Wow, thats too funny. But seriously, this whole issue isn't. What are kids who come from normal, non-communist families, and from normal, small towns going to do when they head back home and are called out on their treasonous associations?

    • haha  

      lets be seriious. those trust fund saddled kids are too scared to storm and silence people unless they're amongst a group of their own. they'll quitely go back w/their tail between their legs

  2. for some  

    reason i'm just find it hard to shed a tear over how you feel about hate mail.

  3. umm

    i cant believe they are writing this stuff to bwog... (emphasis on bwog, not this stuff)

  4. oh please!!!  

    someone take the time to make a university of havana-north admissions application and include

    "Required: Anarchists
    and Anti American Thugs Only need apply. "

    this is so ridiculous!!!!

  5. one sided bwog!!  

    have you received no statements of support for what the protesters did?!?!?!!

    why dont you post those!!!lol.

  6. Anonymous  

    Why does Bwog have to go through this when all they did was report what happened? Even if they were on the "left", why are people judging every Columbian for what a few did?

    #5 Bowg is not is anybody's side. The fact that "the ones who stormed the stage" are still storming on what they're going to do next, doesn't mean Bwog is on their side.

  7. create  

    a petition against the protesters and get a bunch of signatures and I bet Bwog will link to it...

    • i believe that's  

      called posting emails of people who you can contact w/in columbia to register you disgust. hell the first email even said he couldn't find any. does bwog believe that people shouldn't be able to reprimand columbia for ths

  8. Anonymous

    OMG let's call everyone who isn't calling for these peoples' heads a sympathizer, apologist, and biased fascist!

    • exactly  

      they type of bullshit spin bwog has been putting out. good job stepehn for just cementing my point. that's it snark and snark about the story and occasionally toss a bone to teh protestors and make anti kulawik statments. i really hope you weren't looking for sympathy on this post bwog

  9. bwog  

    won't do that. they don't want to tar their precious image of peaceful valiant liberals. and there's no way to deny such emails probably exist as there are tons of liberal sites which covered this story and only had people lauding the storming in their comments

    • Oh, boo hoo

      It's a blog, not a news source. Even if you accepted that the Bwog's coverage was spin-ridden (and I don't, Kulawik-mocking has been standard for years), there's no obligation to provide spin-free content, or there wouldn't be comments.

      • exaclty  

        then quit cryng when we send shit your way in the emails or the comments. we're not crying. bwog is. and now you are cause you're complaining about the truth we're telling. do you guys have any perspective?

  10. hey  

    bwog. have any of your writers actually just outside of reporting sat down and talked to chris kulawik? he's actually a pretty normal kid. I feel like you don't know him and have made him the conservative caricature of what you don't like about conservatives becauses he's likely the only outspoken one you know on this campus.

  11. SS2  

    Chris Kulawik has actively placed himself as the representative of the far right on campus. He has actively taken on many public appearances. This basically makes him a public figure, and makes poking fun at him acceptable. There really is not one specific figurehead of the protest movement, making it impossible to poke fun at a specific protestor.

    • give me  

      a break. such lame excuses. the fact you think chris is far right makes you an idiot who is obviously living ina bubble. and ad hom attacks are never acceptable unless you want to be called on youre childishness in doing so. finally the claim there's no figurehead of the protestors and consequently nobody to poke fun of is silly to. you had a rabble of protestors wearing masks, chanting si se pudo..tons of stuff to poke fun of. not to mention you actually have four figureheads you could have ridiculed--uppity and vapid karina, stupid and inarticulate eva, not ready for primetime avi and short, crazy and batshit crazy socialist monique

    • whaaa?  

      Chris Kuliwak is far right now? What? Are you insane? His article on abortion the other day went so far as to say that he thought it might be wrong that Columbia subidizes below-18 girls' abortions...

      Far right? What? My head is going to explode soon.

  12. So..  

    I think previous commenters in previous threads had mentioned some suspicions that the comment threads had been taken over by a bunch of partisan outsider hacks. These emails and the comments so far in this thread make me inclined to believe those suspicions.

    Bwog, surely you've got the IP addresses of every poster. I'd be interested to know what the general statistical breakdown is on these in terms of the proportion of posts in these threads that come from 160.39.. and 128.59.. subnets and ones that don't.

      • so (again)  

        I'm not suggesting publishing the actual IP addresses-- only whether they're on campus or off campus. Boredatbutler is based on this principle and is nice and anonymous. I'm only curious as to whether all these angry comment threads actually express the sentiments of the Columbia community, or of Mainstream Heartland Non-Secular-Progressive America.

        • Well at least  

          Its interesting that one either expresses the sentiments of the Columbia community, or "Mainstream Heartland Non-Secular-Progressive America".

          Perhaps you didn't mean to communicate that, but perhaps its an adequate expression of your outlook? Admit it, Conservatives aren't part of "your" columbia community. I might live in River but I'm def not really a part of "your" Columbia. "Your" Columbia community would always rally behind a mob that silences invited speakers.

        • Anonymous

          it is obviously not from Columbia as we are all fascist-liberal-anarchists.

      • ldp  

        Well then. Would you like to tell us who you are?

  13. haha  

    "From a neo-Nazi, expressing his confusion over the media's representation of the fracas:

    "I thought these people were jew and negro loving liberals. Was this just a typical spin from the media?""

    HAHA, omg, funniest one of the bunch. I think someone posted a link to some Stormfront forum thread on BWOG a while ago, and the same thing happened. The neo-Nazis got all confused when they heard that the protest banner was denying the holocaust.

  14. Anonymous  

    this is really turning out bad for columbia.

    • why  

      Why? Cause some neo-Nazis are pissed at us? Yeah, jesus, our fundraising drive is surely going down the tank. Within a few days Columbia will surely be shuttering its doors and we'll all be off to Brown.

      • yeah  

        cause everyone who thought this was a disgrace is a neo nazi.

        this'll be hard to believe, but some of our trustees have *gasp* donated to bush

        • And  

          And they're going to stop donating to Columbia because of an incident involving a few students, which the President of the University condemned? Yeah, okayyyy....Voting for Bush means nothing by the way. You really think Bush is against illegal immigration? Wake up, theres obviously a divide in the Republican party. The neocons, business interests and anyone with half a brain knows illegal immigration is vital to the American economy and other than throwing a few scraps to the middle-America drones who keep them elected they're unlikely to do anything about it.

          • not probably  

            solely for it. but count the de genvoa, columbia unbecoming, the earlier conference which was forced off campus, the problems that resulted in the need to create safe spaces and the general image now of columbia as a liberal institution dominated by controversy and you'll find a lot of these guys may only cut half the check they originally intended to and will give the other half to, i don't know, starving children or something.

  15. SS2  

    Ehmmm It is not that hard to find email of people at Columbia to contact. If people who support the protestors can figure out how to contact Columbia, and those who oppose the protestors cannot figure it out, then that implies that either:
    1. more people support the protestors
    2. the people who support the protestors are generally smarter.

    If you spend a long time searching the Columbia site, and can't find Bollinger's email address, sorry but I don't have that much sympathy for you. Despite being a rich, trust-fund, spoiled Communist, fascist, Jihadist (ehm actually I'm somewhat Jewish... how about that?), at least I know how to find an email address on a (not that confusing) website.

  16. Also  

    Did anyone notice in the one titled "Oxymoron of the first Order" that the writer turns random words into proper nouns. Read it as if they're all actually proper nouns "Prolific", "Compassion", etc. Its hilarious.

  17. yea I'm  

    I'm kind of dissapointed in BWOG for linking to ANSWER which is a rather despicable front organization for trotskyites. Most of the rest of the antiwar/progressive crowd despise them... check out their WIKI entry, they are sketch, sketch, sketch

  18. DHI  

    "Anti-American THUGS"!
    We have street cred!
    Anti-American street cred.

  19. Anonymous  

    Again, I wonder how much of the pool of money Prezbo is seeking $2.4 billion from even vaguely shares the sentiments of this sample of hatemail.

  20. Anonymous

    If someone... anyone in this administration, in the previous administration, etc. had taken care of our outdated and very messy immigration system, we would never have had the leader of a disorganized group of border patrollers come to speak at our school.

    Like comment #49 said though, we have a lot of business interests in leaving things as they are. However I don't think this is solely a neoconservative issue as this has been happening forever. Farming lobbies and other special interests have been throwing money at people for a long time.

    • its inconclusive  

      and arguable to say that our business interests make illegal immigration necessary. if you mean corporations and other companies like to employ people at below satisfactory conditions youre right. This could all easily be solved though by building a wall and having a guest worker program. however neither side ever wants to compromise

      • Anonymous

        I'm just saying that fruits and vegetables don't pick themselves.

        • i agree  

          but perhaps its better that we all pay an extra 5 cents for tomatoes so that legal mexican worker can pick tomatoes and still have some type of health insurance and a minimum wage.

          • Already  

            The average wage for picking crops in California is around $6-8 dollars per hour. Contrary to popular opinion, many of the immigrants picking crops are legal, especially after the recent crackdowns. More for certain crops that tend to be more laborious. Obviously not a lot, but its above most minimum wages nationally, and one could argue it beats working at McDonalds. Yet according to this article:
            Most US farms are running low on labour right now. So if the old argument about legal, native Americans willing to do any job is true, why aren't we seeing droves of them moving into the agribusiness sector? Im just wondering if anyone has an answer...

          • citations for  

            the first part please. and the article seems to indicate that there are actions being taken to alleviate the problems. Also how do you know what time scale this re adjustment would operate upon? It's possible that any type of adjustment period might come along with a temporary loss for these industries, but its worthwhile to ensure our laws are respected.

            Nobody is also necessarily arguing against increasing of legal immigration quotas.

          • here  


            According to USDA, "In October 2000, the federal minimum wage was $5.15, the average hourly earnings of field and livestock workers were $7.76, and average hourly nonfarm earnings were $13.69."

            Judging by the efforts to make it harder to cross the border since 2000, I would imagine the wages would be similar if not higher today. $7.75 isnt too bad, it actually is better or up there with a lot of service sector jobs people usually take.

            Im just trying to figure out how this is going to work out. Would you say the claim that Americans wont do hard work like that is true? So far I've found contradicting messages. This article http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0610080323oct08,1,4477095.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
            does quote one an individual who runs a fruit processing plant saying: "Local kids anymore, they don't want to work on the farms," Warren, 35, said. "It could be pretty good money if they were willing to work for it. What I've seen, though, is a decline in work ethic."

            The statistics I quoted above were national, but apparently pay is even higher in some areas, this article deals with apple farms in Michigan:

            " Ocanas said he and other farmers are required by law to pay migrants $9.43 per hour. When several members of his regular crew were delayed this year waiting for their visas, Ocanas said he put a help-wanted ad in the local paper.

            "I got three calls. But when they found out it was picking, they didn't want anything to do with it," he said."

            Also, you state that no one is arguing against raising legal quotas, but if Im not mistaken, arent both Pat Buchanan, VDARE and various other groups against that? Would bringing over people on quotas or some type of temporary labor program continue to diminish American standards of living? Is there something preferable in having established bases of immigrants, or is transient work more beneficial to the economy/society?

            Also, is the lull in workers really a transitory phase, or could it signal other labor problems? Im reading this article: http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/business/15679497.htm and according to one farm manager:

            "To guarantee Carr’s company picks the 37 million pounds he grows each year in Ridge Spring, Carr relies on a guest worker program that guarantees the 300 workers he needs during the peach season’s peak are available and legal. They usually have been from Mexico, he said.

            But the program is difficult to comply with, Carr said.

            The guest worker program requires hiring any interested Americans first, and it forces him to provide free housing and transportation for the workers and pay them $8.37 an hour — a comparatively high rate.

            “By trying to do the right thing, I’m punished with having to pay a higher wage,” Carr said."

          • a couple problems  

            i don't have much time becuase i have to work too, but thanks for actually trying to have an informative debate. First from that data it says avg hourly earning workers of field and stock workers were 7 something. however these are reported on the books workers. These types of studies never indicate illegal immigrants becuase they are off the books. I imagine the illegal immigrants get paid significantly less than legal pickers.

            for the next point, there's no way to rationalize how hard workers americans or teens are, i personally have some friends who have worked as pickers who're legal and who got paid really well for it.

            finally, its been too little time to show whether such a deficit would be a temporary phase and while there may be groups opposed to increasing legal quotas, that's the beauty of democracy. if supporters can convince the american people that increasing quotas would actually help americans overall by improving the economy, then it wouldn't be suprising to see american support expanding legal immigration.

            Either way, the first thing that we should acknowledge is that breaking laws is never good and that illegal immigration should be stopped in the first place before we start tinkering with all these other ideas, as illegal immigration, besides undermining the legal bedrock our nation rests upon, also brings a whole host of other problems with it.

          • immigration  

            Yes, that is probably true about illegal immigrants being paid off-books and less. However since these companies are filing some financial data with the government, and since they are legally mandated by law to offer jobs first to american citizens before seeking foreign workers, native workers would still be able to get the jobs first, and at their high wage. So I dont see how wage depression can emerge unless there is a deficiency of legal citizens applying for the jobs. Im wondering about some of the claims, for example that the minutemen have made about Americans working in crop picking only if the wages are livable. yet these crop-picking jobs seem to be particularly availble to american citizens and pay above minimum wage if you are legal, yet do not seem to be taken.

            Im not sure I completely agree with your last comment. I dont see why ending illegal immigration immediately would be the first priority if all signs indicate that labor force will have be re-introduced at some point to allow the farms to process the crops. Which brings up other questions. What will happen to currently illegal immigrants here? Will they deported and more importantly, banned from re-entering or working in the united states? If so are there any statistics on the available workforce in mexico and abroad able to come over immediately on visa to fill in the labor gap?

            also another point for discussion is NAFTA. according to vicente fox (and apparently this will be carried over into the calderon administration, although that has yet to be seen) mexican workers are being driven into mexico because mexican corn + beans cant compete with subsidized american corn and beans defended by the nafta treaty. should the US augment nafta to re-invigorate certain sectors of the mexican agricultural economy? or should it defend the tariffs as reducing them would cost american jobs?

          • last post-work  

            its very naive to suggest that companies are hiring americans first when they have to pay mmuch less to illegals or that they still report all their earnings. I really suggest you head to a multitude of small businesss across the nation and ask if they report all their earnings exaclty. As a matter of fact, i'm sure the goverment has studies commissioned to say how much they lose over unreported earnings, i'll try to find the study later as i have work now. Thus its extremely unlikely your wage claim, which obviously now doens't apply to illegal immigrants, who often are abused by having to work for very little, is true.

            For the second part, the guest worker program and similiar programs like the one suggested in the boston newspaper woudl likely be sufficient to keep the industry adequately filled until some type of readjustment occurs or the free market has to up the wages or find new innovative methods to correct any possible shortcomings. Either way, congress would find some way (even if it means importation of foreign migrants) to at least create an adequate response to satisfy teh problem. That can all be done even w/the ending of illegal immigration. The fact then that it is plausible even economically to crack down hard on illegal immigration now butresses other reasons to do so.

            As for nafta, that again is policy which is unrelated to enforcing immigration laws but which as you correctly assert, could be important in terms of deciding the ease with which we could enforce such laws. In this case i suspect there may be some renegotiation as regional interests of some amrican farmers would likely be trumped by american interests to end ilegal immigrations--perhaps through a wall, which calderon may soften opposition to if he has somethng to bring back to his people in the form of nafta renegotiations

  21. keb  

    What happened does not represent all of Columbia. Most of us were in our rooms working on homework. I realize that as a student you always represent the University as a whole, but should the whole University be condemned because of what 100 people did? I am not on one side or the other. I think both sides made poor decision that reflected badly on their respective causes. As Avi said, this was an isolated incident and should be treated as such rather than labeled as symptomatic of a larger problem. Columbia is not what happened last Wednesday.

    • this is  

      a fair but never accepted argument. what happened wednesday says something about the character of this campus. for example lets take an analogy and see it through. Somebody who committs a crime for the first time has always been a good person. Perhaps they had some moment of heightened emotion and committed a crime. Then, while the crime was certainly not the norm and while the person on the whole in the past and even in the future might be very moral, they are still judged and punished in the context of the crime. This is reasonable too, becuase while somebody may be good, moments where they waver from aren't some spontaneous, random occurance. They build upon something in the character of the person, or in this example, the university.

      • Davis

        I hope a Columbia student did not post this analogy. Convicting a generally good person for one crime is not in any way the same as making a generalization about a large institution based on the actions of less than 1%. See where I'm coming from?

        • quit with  

          the ad hom. i understand your complaint. That the action was based upon a very small and almost insignificant part of the populace. However the same can be said about the 'criminals' character. The person in general may be 99% moral, but action upon even that 1% of that immoral character is still something which the person is responible for.

          • but  

            that analogy is still unfair. One person has controll over thier decisions 100% baring insanity and coercion. The 99% of us who had nothing to do with it also had no controll over the stage rushers. If you follow your idea society as a whole should be punished for the fact that there are a small minority of criminals.

          • yeah  

            you're talking about agency, which i tried to mention. The point isn't about agency-its about being representative of an entity. unfair or not, the entire institution is viewed in terms of its consitutuents actions' and as a result it has to accept that standard, for good or bad.

          • still  

            viewed in that light it makes a lot more sense. However, saying the university is responsible takes it a bit to far. Responsiblity implies agency on the university's part Although I do agree that the 1% do serve as a representation this does not mean that everyone should be punished.

          • that's the thing  

            the insitution acting as one agent is responsible, and that's how the university generally represents itself to teh public. that's why we're so proud of 'our' nobel prizes and fields medals. It doesn't mean most of our students are that impressive but you can bet thats how our university is still going to be judged. It's the same reason for example, why the us army's image is tarred when some of its soldiers abused prisoner at abu ghraib.

          • sad thing  

            if columbia hires a nobel prize winner, it is lauded. within the context of this media frenzy, however, no one will notice/care when columbia takes disciplinary measures against the protesters. why? it makes it a less convenient target for those who wish to brand us the "university of havana north". short memories and the need for a big, bad "jihadist" university for the "culture warriors" to crusade against will ensure that minor things like facts and details are lost in the attempt to deliver america from the satanic grip of columbia university and its universally malicious student body...

          • or columbia  

            could sack and hire one of the many qualified conservative academics and make news as being one of the first prominent universities to at least attept to introduce some diversity

          • I think that  

            we’re just arguing over semantics, particularly the notion of "responsibility" which we may even be approaching from different definitions. If we look at the university as a whole then yes it is responsible; I still think that is an unfair way to see things. I agree though that the public is lumping everyone together, the E-mails show that clearly. In the interest of my studying I'm not going to argue any more but I would like to thank you for proving that two people can actually engage in civil debate.

          • Davis

            I understand what you are trying to say, and I agree with it: some people are going to assume that the protesters are representative of Columbia students in general. I was just pointing out how bad your analogy was. Political pundits misuse analogies all the time and its annoying. Also, my argument was not an ad hominem argument - I was attacking your analogy which was, in fact, your argument. The first sentence of my post was just an expression of disappointment that a fellow Columbia student could make such a ridiculous comparison. Also, I don't pick on spelling, but choose your language better. "Has to accept that standard." Pretty bad. I know what you mean, but jeez.

          • my analogy  

            was only slightly flawed. as an institution columbia is one agent and will be viewed as so, and as a consequence, its one percent of agency which is used in a manner which is embarassing will reap bad press

  22. Anonymous

    I don't disagree with you

    • what's  

      weird is i'm almost sure we're a majority and yet that was the only voice not represented during teh gilchrist talk and in this 'debate' so far on bwog

      • Anonymous

        This is what I think has happened.

        Gilchrist is just a poor spokesman for immigration. Not anything to do with him, but just by nature of his disorganized organization that could be composed of blacks, whites, latinos, racists, white power elements, etc. There is no reason to think that people saying that the Minutemen are a problem are lying, sure there are probably plenty of people patroling the border and letting the US Border and Customs agents know when something is going down, but there are certainly a few people who have intimidated immigrants, fired at them, and poked holes in water tanks that are set up near the border so that illegals don't die of dehydration.

        The debate has completely shifted from border security and immigration to one of crimes against immigrants. So really what I think has happened is that, I think it was a bwog poster that put it best, expatriated nationalists that have lumped the activity of a handful of citizens going a little too far with vigilantism (I don't think that's a word), and an organization like the Minutemen that is not well organized and does not have the means or the will to take accountability for things that have happened.

        In the midst of this, I think we all forgot about the central topic of discussion. That's my 2 cents.

  23. for example  

    i understand another complaint that there's a different between action within one agency and one agency amongst 100 who acts in an adverse manner. However, as long as that agent is part of columbia, columbia still bears flak for the immature protestors actions. It's the same reason we're lauded for that one nobel prize winner.

  24. umm  

    i have a trust fund. and i am against the minute men...BUT i am not for storming the stage. assuming people with trust funds are mindless drones is just a more pc form of labeling.

  25. man  

    i wish that at times like these, people would remember the golden rule:

    no one cares about any of your opinions.

  26. oh, bwog!  

    does anyone remember when bwog was fun? now bwog is as bad as anything at columbia: the core, mealac. the crazy, overly PC assholes that make this place suck have set up camp. why does everyone at this school bicker CONSTANTLY about hermeneutics, rhetoric, and free-fucking-speech. good job, columbians, we've destroyed bwog, one of the only enjoyable things about Columbia. RIP BWOG, we hardly knew thee.

    • Uh?  

      BWOG is ten times better now than it ever was. And what "overly PC assholes" are on here? How does this discussion in any way relate to MEALAC or the Core Curriculum? Sorry if the grown-ups talking about real issues are depriving you of your ability on your campus gossip. Maybe one day when you step outside of the liberal insular Columbia bubble you'll find out what the real world is like.

    • yes  

      god forbid we debate things at columbia. let's get back to what matters: random funny bullshit. after all, that is why we attend an ivy league school, and not clown college.

      for the record: both the minutemen and the protesters belong in clown college, in my opinion; the minutemen remedially.

  27. Columbian  

    I am proud to be a Columbia student. Yes, the situation that erupted was deplorable. Regardless of who was to blame, I think we all can agree that the resulting polarization and violence has been unfortunate.

    However, this does not make me ashamed to be a Columbia student. The instance resulted because we are a University in which students care about the world around them, and honestly believe that they can influence the world. Students see something that they consider injust, and seek to chance it.

    Unfortunately sometimes people do not realize what will be the results of their actions, and we end up in a situation that was not originally intended. However, at least we are not a University of apathy; at least we care too much instead of too little.

    Although the incident was unfortunate, it does not destroy my pride in being a Columbian.

    • yes but  

      presumably revolutionary guerillas tearing each other to shreds in third world civil wars also "care passionately" about issues. so does a child throwing a temper tantrum over its inability to get a desired toy. this is not necessarily a reason to laud such individuals.

      now if columbians cared and worked responsibly (and thereby effectively) toward change, that would be a different story.

    • i'm ashamed  

      you're one of my peers. you can't even acknowledged the protestors who broke through barracades and stormed the stage effectively silenced the speaker. you're proud because you can trample upon others free speech

      • sad  

        the sad thing about all of this is that some people still can't distinguish between opposition to a given issue and the tactics used to oppose it. the more extreme in their eyes, the better. it makes me worry that o'reilly is justified in equating some of my fellow students with terrorists.

    • Anonymous  

      You know, I agree with you. A lot. More and more every second.

      I for one am surprised at how many people are quick to condemn the people who ran onstage, yet if you think back to how SHOCC (even if you disagree with their ideas) were at least trying to do something constructive, they became instant targets of ridicule. Columbia students are willing to criticize people who stand up for their beliefs - even if we disagree with those beliefs - but how many of these fingers pointers have ever had to fight for anything in their entire lives?

      Oh yeah, and I'm waiting for the first person to go "OMG HOW WOULD YOU LIKE THE HAVE MANDATORY DIVERSITY TRAINING!!!" simply because I said "SHOCC." Let 'er rip.

      • dear julia  

        I think most of us, agree or disagree, have nothing against the protest groups at our school. we generally support the fact that they be able to express their views. these groups become intolerable, however, when they attempt to shut down the expression or advocacy of others' views, whether concretely, by rushing the stage they're speaking on, or more abstractly, by advocating the creation of a program that tells people how to think about "diversity". these protesters would be appalled if their demonstrations were broken up by campus security, or if they were forced to sit through lectures in which they were told it was unacceptable and/or offensive that they be anything other than archconservative. it is hypocritical of them to engage in similar breakups, therefore, or to advocate similar programs.

      • you're conflating  

        different things. first with regards to shocc. they were ridiculed because of their abrasive tone and some of their suggestions for how columbia should change or how everyone had essentially sinned against their fellow student.

        Secondly, your apologism is truly disconcerting. Many people believe deeply in certain things. That doesn't mean that one should try to express that phsyically, especially in situation here where there was actually forum set up for a discussion of these strongly held feeling. In fact, your failure to recognize that storming and taking over the stage physically is disconcerting becuase from there it is only one short step to claim that some points don't merit being heard out or that violence or intimidatory tactics are sometimes understandable.

        • Anonymous  

          Eh, my apologism would be disconcerting if the protestors had actually presented a physical threat to the speaker. And from the footage I've seen, they look like a bunch of people holding a banner. Yes, their action instigated violence, and yes, what they did was obnoxious, but so far the only real culprit of any physical harm is that idiot captured by Univision cameras kicking someone repeatedly. And he wasn't part of the protest group.

          Besides, did anyone honestly expect there to be any constructive discussion when you have people as polarizing as the Minutemen, who come onstage rambling about thanking their deity of choice? I was under the impression that most people in the audience came in already believing that the Minutemen are a group of nuts who like to wave around guns and (figuratively) yell GET OFF MY LAWN at people crossing the border, and let's face it, from what was said before the protestors took over, the Minutemen weren't doing much to change that perception. One vigilante group got another in response.

          • this is pathetic  

            first of all. numerous people there have already said they did feel threatened from the 20 or so people who broke through BARRICADES and ran at the stage at an angle. At one point you even see kulawik bracing for a guy he thinks is heading for the stairs up. And you even admit their action instigated violence. This violence and their storming stopped the event. Thus they did fuel this entire event. You condone that.

            Secondly, you just demonstrated my second fear. Youre claiming that because the minutemen weren't saying things you appreciated or liked that it was ok for people to force them off. That is horrible. Silence people you disagree w/? So what, if somebody mentions god in an argument you can kick them off? fair enough. from now on though, anybody somebody tries to make a race, class, gender argument i shoudl be allowed to yell them out until they stop talking. And while some of the people in the audience might have though the minutemen were gun toting idiot, they spoiiled the event for the entire audience, where if you see the video, most of the audience was actually sitting trying to listen to the speech. Thus you are wrong on that part too. Gilchrist and the rest also came in suits and tried to make written down verbal arguments, not an act of vigilantism which was met with chaotic juvenile oppressive behavior. Finally, you are pre judging the minutemen to make the claim they were reprehensible enough to be worthy of being shouted and browbushed off the stage. Do you understand you're already crossed over into the line where only certain ideas are acceptable? You are at this point embracing silencing and oppressive tendencies which are ironically the ones shocc purports to oppose. On top of that you are fine with making certain political groups feel uncomfortable and oppressing their free speech and dissemination of ideas.

          • Anonymous  

            *sigh* I never said I supported SILENCING or FORCING PEOPLE OFF. I said I support the right for a group of protestors carrying a banner to make their point and then be escorted off by public safety staff, the same way that things went for Ashcroft. The protestors did not go up there to beat up anybody. They went up to hold a banner that made their point. What should have been a MINOR INTERRUPTION turned into a fracas because the people who violently reacted to the banner-holders MADE IT THAT WAY.

            And to #102, hmmm, I'm a bigot? And I'm oppressive? And I'm violent? Strange how you arrive at this conclusion as I didn't throw any punches or make anyone quit talking...I can throw around loaded words just as well as anyone else, too!

          • please  

            you weren't even thre and you repeatedly ignore the fact about a dozen of them ran up and trampled a barracade as they rushed upon stage. there's nothing peaceful in that action. and this is nothing like the ashcroft even for reasons i already mentioned. look, if you're ok w/a group of conservatives from now on disrupting every event w/an interest group like NOW or NARAL or the ACLU or AMNESTY the same way, then fine, but either way you are actually asking for the lowering of discrouse

  28. CU alum

    In response to several posts on this blog, I don't think that anyone (other than those seeking ridiculously cheap labor) are PRO-illegal immigration. I'm sure everyone who rushed the stage AND everyone who protested would prefer if it were easier for people in dire situations in Mexico to be able to immigrate legally. At the end of the day, few Columbians want a bunch of [insert appropriate adjectives here] middle-aged men patrolling the border and pulling Dick Cheney's on border jumpers. Funny how the nation wanted so badly to keep Elian Gonzales here a few years ago yet these Minutemen are deemed okay by those irate enough to send hate mail to the Bwog.

    After 4 years at the school, I was probably the least inclined to "give back" as an alum after a lot of BS that went on on campus. And while I am not necessarily in favor of those who rushed the stage, I am proud of Columbia students for caring about something that is important, that is protest-worthy, and something that is local yet often overlooked by issues happening farther away. Bill O'Reilly says we alums shouldn't give yet (partially since I will do the opposite of anything O'Reilly says) I am more inclined to make donations as an alum.

    And University of Havana - North? At least the cigars we'll be smoking at the Columbia Club will be better than those smoked by them Princeton Pussies (I can say that now, right?)

    Great coverage, Bwog! Avi - you were great on O'Reilly though I wish he wasn't such an ass and that you could have spoken for longer.

  29. protester  

    I was at the protest (indoor one). and the plan was not to shut down the event.. the idea was that we would hold the banner (eventually to be escorted off by security) and that's it. There was no plan of shutting down the event. The violence was initiated by the minutemen supporters and I believe some college republicans. The violence was the reason the event was ended. The protest was peaceful; the reaction was not. Oh, and in response to "dear julia" (above) ... Don't you think generally today there are programs that tell us what to think in regards to "diversity". For example, I was taught racism is wrong and murdering human beings is wrong. I wasn't presented with the case for/against these things. As a society, we have decided murdering is wrong and so is racism. Btw that's the reason why I'm against the minutemen. I believe the border should be enforced, but not by the minutemen. They are racist and villify ilegal immigrants.

    • Anonymous  

      Yeah, that's the impression I was under - that the people with the banner would act up, make their point, and be escorted off, just like during the Ashcroft speech. If the people who threw the first punches had just let Public Safety do their job and take the protestors outside, the speech most likely would have continued.

      For the record, I'm definitely not a member of the ISO or any related groups. But I like a good display of audacity every now and then.

      • a good display of  

        audacity? how about a good display of audacity not against a group that already feels silenced on campus during an event where they were trying to present an opportunity for both sides to speak out.

        By the way, this is nothgn like the ashcroft event. In the ashcroft event, the banner was in the audience and thus easily dealt with. Here a dozen plus previously yelling and paper throwing protestors broke though a barrier and stormed the stage, and there were people running around the stage too if you examine thee video towards the stairs. This is completely different and because of the huge mob that looked to be heading in at an angle i can guarantee you that everyone in the front row felt like they were in phsyical danger. Your continued support of this an other audacity suggests that julia kite doesnt really value discourse or debate, but only wishes her own views to be supported and is happy to stamp out views she disagrees w/by audacious violent means. Do you understand how pathetic and disgusting that opinion is? I promise you if this was kate michelman or michael moore you would be disgusted you oppresive hypocrite.

        • Anonymous  

          If they wanted to make a serious point about the immigration debate, surely they could have picked a better group than the Minutemen...how about a group more representative of their mainstream base, not a bunch of wannabe paramilitaries?

          • again  

            you're taking it upon yourself to decide what groups are acceptable with no good reason. if you have evidence the group is racist or violent then post it and don't slander. the reason why the minutmen are great for debate is because they are actually on the front lines for surveillence and that they are composed of regular americans who feel so strongly that they have went and decided to aid the government (sitting on property [they obtain permission from owners] and reporting illegals who they surveil isn't vigilantism). Just because they're not some guy from a think tank doesn't mean that they can't make reason or informed arguments for enforcing the laws of the country or helping the government enforce the laws. In fact its elitist and ignorant to suggest that becuase they're (i guess veterans and average americans) unspectacular in terms of their academic credentials that they somehow don't represent a viable voice in the immigration debate.

        • LOL  

          Trying to put on an event to spark discussion? Is that why in the first speech and the initial part of Gilchrist's speech the actual issue of illegal immigration was relegated behind the apparently more important goal of berating, taunting and doing everything possible to provoke the audience? There was very little even said about the issue, cumulatively most of that night involved the two speakers making fun of the audience, doing weird gimmicky things (answering the phone from his wife?), and preaching about the fine elements of morality and religion, which while fine, was probably not what most people came to talk about.

          • here's the  

            problem, becuase again you're tring to mislead. Gilchrist did that after the crowd had heckled stewart for 40 minutes and had gotten so rowdy that he couldn't even say anything. the protesters heckling at that point was so despicable that gilchrist was warranted in chastising them. what did you expect, him to stand up there and take it? seeriously, do you ever care to look at this from an even handed perspective? also, who are you to judge whether or not he shoudl make religious/moral arguments. maybe to you they do nothign, but they are legitimate to make and youre disregard for any decency suggests again you are the culprits in this instance. i truly hope all the protestors are punished in some form

          • but  

            but nothing to the guy who kicked some kid walking off-stage in the head? ok, sounds fair

          • too bad i didn't  

            mention that and you're assuming. in fact i hope the person who maliciously kicked the lady has criminal charges pressed upon him as it was truly violent, minutemen or not.

            stinks when your opponents are actually consistent with their logic, huh?

    • prove  

      that the minuteman are a racist organization and responsible for murders w/sourced evidence otherwise stop your slander. i can claim you and julia are advocating violent silencing of those who disagree with you. thus making you oppressive, violent bigots

  30. Columbian  

    COMPLETELY agree with J Train.

    The protest got out of hand. We can say that the protestors were naive in not realizing what would result. But from the video it is clear that they did NOT start the violence, and most likely that they had no clue that violence would result.

    Yea, it shouldn't have happened, but they should NOT be expelled or have their lives destroyed or anything like that. They went onstage with a banner and got mobbed. There have been other protests where people went onstage with a banner and either were allowed to stand by the side of the stage or were peacefully escorted out. The fact that this did not happen was unfortunate and I am not justifying it, but I do not feel that having any students' futures destroyed over this is fair.

  31. Help?  

    Since no one is responding in the other thread. Some individuals have claimed that in the Univision video you can see a person in gray running towards Chris Kulawik. Could someone point me to what second mark that is visible in?

  32. the comforting  

    thing is that at least 4 out of 5 spec respondents disagreed w/the actions of teh protestors http://www.columbiaspectator.com/poll/index.cfm?event=displayPollResults&poll_question_id=18492

  33. People, people  

    People, people, wake up, there are more important things going on in the world than who wins a debate on f'ing BWOG, like, for example, the fact that North Korea just successfully detonated a nuclear weapon.

  34. *dies laughing*  

    "Hey mom, we've been spelling it wrong all this time! We're actually "MOOSElems." Thanks for posting these guys.

  35. Anonymous  

    I agree with #116
    North Korea is going to destroy us!
    Illegals are crossing the border, but North Korea will leave no border. Who are the minutemen going to hunt?

  36. Theo

    Why on Earth did I ever fancy going to Columbia University? There was a time I though getting a degree at Columbia had real value and merit: I even attended a Chinese Language Course there and earned an "A" from Prof. Ben Wang. A Great Man stuck in a lousy institution. You lowlives are doing a real dis-service to Academia. In fact, I eventually found my path at an alternative institute of higher learning and earned a Master's Degree. God Bless the American way, I make more money than your Socialist President and doing my part to restore this Great Nation by undoing the work of the Hippy.

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.