Comments on Hate at Carnegie Mellon

• Congrats
• Posted by David Merkowitz at University of Cincinnati on February 22, 2005 at 9:40pm EST

• Very good reporting..normally this sort of news article is poorly done..and makes things worse..this does sound troubling..

• anti-semitism carnegie
• Posted by Sam Price on February 23, 2005 at 4:23am EST

• Yo! This ain't new. Didn't anybody take history class? This was a tactic using bogus groups by formerer FBI director J. Edgar Hoover in the 60s to create hostility between organizations, etc. Fact that campus police helped take out recordings, etc. was your "red flag." Hello? Anybody home in that audience?

• HATE AT CARNEGIE MELLON
• Posted by DANIEL STEIN on February 23, 2005 at 8:48am EST

• The lesson is not about the supposed "perils of free speech" but about the coswardice and stupidity of university administrators who hide behind the Bill of Rights as they abandon their responsiblities to educate their ignorant students (notably the followers of Brother Shabazz) and protect others from what was clearly outrageous behavior inappropriate to a university campus, even the likes of Carnegie Mellon.

• Posted by Bob Sarlin on February 23, 2005 at 11:09am EST

• A good guage for the application of basic First Amendment rights is the level of discomfort that a speaker or group provokes.
  My first reaction to this article was, "How could Carnegie Mellon give credence to this creep by allowing him to be invited to speak?"
  My second, and I think more constitutionally-correct response is that no one was physically harmed or psychologically damaged by this session, and the speaker revealed himself to be a bigoted fool, whose ideas are way out of the mainstream and not to be taken seriously. I'm sure no one left the meeting ready to take up his cause.
  All in all, a successful use of first amendment-based "sunshine" to reveal the flaws in a hateful political philosophy.
  We should encourage such appearances - the truth shall help you see.

• Educational Responsibility
• Posted by Hate is not free speech on February 23, 2005 at 7:04pm EST

• This is part of a disturbing trend. Recently Duke Universtiy was also convulsed in a spate of Jew bashing which could have easily been prevented if appropriate and reasonable oversight and guidance had been exercised.

  http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006102

  The ADL has an excellent section on their website discussing the issue of Hate Speech versus Free Speech. Shabazz is entitled to his racism and is free to promote it. But educational institutions do not have an obligation to facilitate him or publicize his twisted views. Rather, schools should be at the forefront of speaking against them.

  http://www.adl.org/Sih/SIH-intro1.asp

  Likewise, the infamous antisemitic tract, (which Shabazz put on his reading list at CMU) "The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews", should never be taught on any respectable university campus. This fictional work fantacizes a worldf Jewish conspiracy against Blacks and blames the Jews for the international slave trade although there is obviously no evidence to support the claims.

  There is no justification for having Shabazz on campus. Well known false hateful propaganda has no educational value.

• Posted by Vania Mascioni on February 25, 2005 at 11:40am EST

• No one was psychologically damaged? Did you read this passage right?

  "At one point, he asked all the Jews in the room to raise their hands and say who is a Jew and then he asked who is a Zionist and the people with him told these students, 'I'm watching you.' One of our students was in tears."

• Shabazz
• Posted by bill wells on February 28, 2005 at 4:30pm EST

• I hope the university also has a policy which requires that speakers give time for responses. It would have been interesting to see what the outcome of the meeting would have been if members of the audience denounced the black race.

• Shabazz at Carnegie Mellon
• Posted by R' Alex Galor on March 1, 2005 at 4:34am EST

• My compliments to Messrs. Murphy and Weil! Scalawags like Shabazz, David Duke etc. can flourish because of the weak-kneed, mealy-mouthed reaction of people like these in charge. Commitment to "Free Speech" doesn't include to provide a forum for hate propaganda, regardless of the skin color or ideological provenance of the perpetrators. At that, the university authorities had every right to cancel the event immediately when the personal thugs of Shabazz violated the code of prohibition of weapons. As far as the Jewish students' reaction is concerned,I can only deplore their lack of intestinal fortitude. When a neo-Nazi like Shabazz asked Jews in the audience to identify themselves they should have reacted with open defiance and demanded that he apologize or stop his diatribe. To submit meekly to such abuse and then to be in tears, only emboldens such hate-mongers and will lead to even more despicable expressions of anti-Semitism by this outfit in the future.
  That the other non-Jewish students in the audience did not raise a single voice in protest is even more appalling.
  To paraphrase the late great Senator from Arizona, Barry Goldwater-Genteelism in the face of brutality is no virtue, aggressiveness in face of thuggery is no vice.
  The student body at CM, particularly the Jewish students, could benefit from a major bone graft to stiffen their malleable spines.

• Posted by joseph h. ehrenkranz , executive director at center for christian-jewish understanding on March 1, 2005 at 3:21pm EST

• it would be useful to read some comments from the leadership of sprint, the org that invited the speaker

• Posted by Jeffrey D. Brunner on March 4, 2005 at 4:27am EST

• The university administration's attempt to cloak its tolerance of intolerance in philosophic garb is nearly as nauseating as the speakers. I would not have thought that I would ever long for the return of the petty fascist college and university administrators of the early 70s, but as wrong-headed as they often were they would never have tolerated anything like this.

  That said, it is the students--black and white, jew, gentile, muslim, black muslim, and wiccan--who are the real villains of this event.

  If the students of the late 60s and early 70s had reached an auditorium only to discover racially separate entrances, the auditorium would have remained empty. (Of course, we would likely have assumed that segregation, not new segregation, was the cause.

  If the racial separation of the entrances had passed unnoticed, the auditorium would have emptied nearly as quickly as it had filled.

  And had someone asked the jews to identify themselves and then said "I'm watching you," he would have needed police protection, an ambulance, or both.

  I used to oppose the hate crime laws on free speech grounds, but who could continue to do so after reading this? If Malik Shabbazz did not cry "Fire! in a crowded theater, then what would it take to do so.

  Of course, with students as spineless and brain-dead as these, a fire might not have been so bad an idea.

  I am not jewish, Mr. Shabbazz, but I'd suggest you watch me anyway. The generation that fought for and won your right to force racially separate entrances upon white people will not stand for this kind of shit.

  Try us.

• Shabazz
• Posted by Charles , Well Said, Jeffrey on November 1, 2005 at 2:30pm EST

• thanks for your comments, Jeffrey. It's one thing to be the victim of abuse; its another to sit and helplessly *take* the abuse that's being dished out. I condemn Shabazz's comments. As a progressive black person, i find him repulsive and stupid.

• this
• Posted by aaron , no doubt at prison on May 1, 2006 at 2:05pm EDT

• it amazes me that this happened and nobody says hardly a word. wow.

• What Do You Really Know
• Posted by Roberta at Carnegie Mellon University on June 14, 2006 at 5:50am EDT

• What’s interesting about reading all the comments is that so many of you speak against what Shabazz said at his lecture, but I don’t remember seeing any of you there. You carelessly take everything this reporter has written as truth. Don’t you realize that the media misconstrues the truth merely for effect? Doesn’t it concern you that most of the quotes are from Jewish students and leaders or that none of the students from the Black student organization that brought Shabazz were available for interviews? What about the fact that there were no quotes from the Black student population, because believe it or not not all Black students are members of the Black student organization. FYI, the “many journalists asked to leave” was only one. It was Carnegie Mellon’s own school newspaper that was asked to leave by the Black student organization and not Shabazz. This was done because the newspaper has been known to bad-mouth the Black student organization and make racist commentary about Black people, women, and homosexuals. Also, how dare you call any Carnegie Mellon student ignorant for wanting Shabazz to come or for being his follower, maybe you could call them misguided, but ignorant is not even the correct word choice. And who are you talking about when you refer to “his followers”. Only one student at Carnegie Mellon was a follower, NO ONE ELSE; however, the real ignorant people of this world have left us NON-FOLLOWERS with the blame. I walk around my campus and just because my skin is dark cocoa I am asked why I believe what Shabazz believes. I only went to the lecture, I never said I agreed, none of the Black students did, but as always, white America decides to tell us our choice rather than let us make them. Well, I’m sick of this. Shabazz came to our school and yes he hurt people, but he also enriched some. What is not spoken about is how he addressed the issue of the young Black man and his responsibilities to his family and community. No body talks about how he spoke of Black women as queens and encouraged us to reach for the sky. Nobody acknowledges his concerns with the Black community and his positive responses on how to rebuild it. And do you know that many of the so-called “anti-Semitic” talk is referring to Shabazz’s explanation of Slave history. Who wouldn’t feel attacked if they were being shown in gruesome words and pictures of how their race maliciously beat, raped, lynched, and murdered another race. What you commenters are lacking is the experience of being in the same room with a Black man that powerful. He put fear into the hearts of so many just by showing up. He didn’t come with a heart of violence. He didn’t really come to lecture the CMU community, he came to encourage and empower the Black college student. To address some other things: The entrance to the auditorium was not race separated. The members of the Black organization had reserved seating because they brought him. It just so happens that most of the members are Black. As far as openly opposing Shabazz, students did and it was a half black half white student that did it. She was brave and bold. Also, there was a Q&A session after the lecture. I do not agree with everything that Shabazz says and does, but I don’t think there was anything wrong with bringing him to our university, my university, a university that subtlety reminds me, everyday, that I am black woman in their white world. I’m happy Shabazz came. It’s sad that it took such an extremist to speak candidly in order for the school and many of its students to realize that racism exists on the campus. It appalls me that just a year before Shabazz came, there had been an article published in the CMU newspaper that contained a comic using the word “nigger” in a very negative connotation, and when the Black students spoke, their sentiments were easily dismissed by some of the very same students that were “in tears” at the Shabazz lecture. The media only gives you half of the story. Never trust them. Always find the truth for yourself.

• know your faces
• Posted by ShaVonne on June 14, 2006 at 10:05am EDT

• I have to agree with Roberta as a Black female at CMU. These "people in tears" and "men with weapons" is all propoganda. I was at the lecture and I have to agree that this group was very miltant looking but no one was harrassed or degraded. As a matter of fact I distinctly remember him say "I have nothing against JEWS its zionism that I object to because of their unfair and hateful actions to the others around them." He then began to discuss their unfair take over and the war that they are currently embarking on. All this was about 10 minutes. The rest of the hour long lecture was about the decline of the black society and how we should/could change it. I noticed that this article did not mention how the Tartan, our newspaper, targets SPIRIT on a regular basis and this was just one more thing for them to hone into. I also dont see the mention of some Jewish and white students screaming Obscenities at him while he spoke, or the fact that someone overode the lighting system in order to end the speech, or the protest that threatened to keep him out of the building. Or the verbal attack he took and challenged during the Q & A. This article is more than bias and missing TRUTH. How about getting the view point of some of the REAL students involved before you report such BULL but I guess that ignorance is bless! All I hope is that the next time someone calls me a "nigger" on my campus you take as much time to report that RACISM as you did to write such nonesence.