It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks
No one is denying anyone the "right" to speak at Berkeley. As I've said in this thread before, self censorship isn't a violation of freedom of speech.
Sure it is. It's called the chilling effect
originally posted by: underwerks
Who am I defending? Conservatives in this thread automatically assume you're defending rioters that break and burn things when you disagree with them.
Who made the threat? When was it made? Is there any evidence of it? Or are we to blindly trust what the media tells us, as long as we agree with it?
Pundits like Coulter receive pages of speaking engagement invites every week. Am I to think that she just randomly chose the one from the small Berkeley conservative group to attend? That Milo just randomly chose Berkeley out of all the speaking invites he received?
The politics of Berkeley are well known, so if she feared for her (or the students) safety then why didn't she choose another conservative group somewhere else to speak to?
These are all questions in my mind. I think it would do well for people to remember that political pundits are a business, first and foremost, and they lend their appearance where it will get the most exposure. Or in this case and ones like it involving Berkeley, controversy.
Political pundits sell controversy, not astute political analysis.
Very undemocratic behavior to say the least.
Ya know in a DEMOCRACY where TWO sides get a say in matters.
I understand what the chilling effect is, and that's not what is going on here. Reading further, the conservative group that invited her decided to cancel because they couldn't do it the exact way they wanted.
That didn't stop her from spinning it into something to outrage her followers. It's a game to pundits like her. And the people falling for it on both sides are being played.
because she had lost the backing of conservative groups that had initially sponsored her appearance.
The school said she could speak only at a later date and an earlier time of day, when there were likely to be fewer students on campus and less of a likelihood for violent outbreaks.