Columbia crash

Freedom of speech is under attack again.\nLast week at Columbia University, Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist, whose organization opposes illegal immigration, was invited to give a speech by the Columbia College Republicans. Gilchrist was only seconds into his speech when he was interrupted by protestors rushing the stage in what appeared to be a deliberate attempt to stop him from speaking. A fist fight between attendees erupted as a result of the protest. Though it is unclear who all the protestors were, two individuals from the International Socialist Organization unveiled a banner on stage that read, "No human being is illegal!"\nThis attack on free speech is scary enough, but what is more disturbing is what was said afterwards.\nOne of the protestors on stage, who asked The Columbia Spectator that he not be identified, said, "I don't feel like we need to apologize or anything. It was fundamentally a part of free speech. ... The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration."\nNot a legitimate part of the debate on immigration? Just because someone disagrees with someone else does not give them any less a right to express their opinion.\nWe here at the editorial board feel that preventing someone with an opposing viewpoint from being heard is the real threat to free speech.\nUnfortunately, this type of incident is not limited to Columbia. A similar situation occurred right here at IU.\nSince 2005, two very controversial speakers, David Horowitz and Ann Coulter, have been invited to speak at the IU Auditorium, much in the same way Gilchrist was invited to speak at Columbia.\nHorowitz spoke about his academic bill of rights and Coulter spoke about a variety of issues, but both speeches were interrupted by protestors. Only quick thinking on the part of university police prevented a Columbia-style melee from erupting. \nSo why are these incidents such a big deal? Because they are becoming more common. \nControversial speakers are being invited to offer a certain point of view and then are forcibly prevented from speaking by certain groups that disagree with their message. While we do not take a position on the views of Gilchrist or those protesting him, we feel that not allowing him to speak was a serious mistake.\nNot only do these types of protests prevent a diversity of views from being heard, they also tend to make the protestors look bad and the speaker look good. Gilchrist and the Minutemen left Columbia looking like they were the reasonable ones, victimized by radical protestors.\nGreat job, protestors.\nThe simple fact is that freedom of speech means freedom of speech. You might not like or agree with what someone is saying, but it is the duty of U.S. citizens to allow dissenting opinions to be heard in order to guarantee First Amendment rights for all.