Stanford administration is responsible for what happened tonight, as they aided and abetted the smear campaign that the Stanford Daily and Stanford Review carried out, and coddled the students who were spuriously claiming that they felt “threatened” by my presence. Above all, they are responsible for refusing to enforce their own policy regarding disruption of the event. Even after the fascist students left, they refused to admit others who wanted to get in. What were Stanford officials afraid of? That someone might hear a truth that the elites have deemed unacceptable?
The Stanford administration also barred the Young America’s Foundation from streaming the event. The reason behind that was clear: they didn’t want the behavior of Stanford students to be exposed before the world. They knew what was coming, and they supported it.
If this were a sane academic environment, Stanford President Marc Tessier-Lavigne and Provost Persis Drell would be forced to resign in disgrace for allowing first the smear campaign that preceded my event, and then for allowing it to be disrupted. But this is not a sane academic environment, and Stanford is not in any genuine sense a university.
In The Coming of the Third Reich, historian Richard J. Evans explains how, in the early days of National Socialist Germany, Stormtroopers (Brownshirts) “organized campaigns against unwanted professors in the local newspapers [and] staged mass disruptions of their lectures.” We have seen just that play out at Stanford: a massive and libelous smear campaign in the Stanford student press, and then the disruption of the event itself. Stanford is just an Antifa recruitment center, not a center of learning.
Meanwhile, I can’t stop laughing at the report below. I did not say “neo-grouchers,” but I do wish I had. I don’t know what I said at that precise moment, but it was probably “neo-fascists.” “Neo-grouchers” is much better. Thanks, Lisa Amin Gulezian.
“Stanford students walk out on talk from author they say is ‘racist, Islamophobic,'” by Lisa Amin Gulezian, KGO, November 15, 2017:
PALO ALTO, Calif. (KGO) — Minutes after author Robert Spencer started to speak, the packed room cleared out.
“You are all little totalitarians and neo-grouchers, a stain on Stanford University and academia in general,” Spencer said, directing his attention to students in the audience.
It was an orchestrated move by students who opposed Spencer’s presence on campus. The university’s Young Republicans sponsored the event.
Many students expressed outrage that Spencer, the director of the website Jihad Watch, was invited.
“Racism, bigotry isn’t welcome. Those espousing hatred can’t have a platform on this campus,” said student Jana Kholy.
When asked if he was racist or Islamophobic, Spencer responded with laughter. “I’m neither one. Islam is not a race. Mass murder is not a race.”
Though Bruin Hall was nearly empty after the walkout, Spencer supporters weren’t allowed in. Organizers insisted that Spencer was invited to create a dialogue….
In the meantime, 200 or so students gathered nearby in support of what they say the true Stanford is about.
“I will not continue hate speech on this campus,” said one student.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Neo-groucher:
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/2678877977/617fd5d2ee2151b992e5617d9c834e8b.jpeg
Papa Whiskey says
Hah! Too bad we can’t shitcan them all!
Voytek Gagalka says
Sufficient that they “shitcan” themselves without even knowing. Ha!
Angus says
“When asked if he was racist or Islamophobic, Spencer responded with laughter. “I’m neither one. Islam is not a race. Mass murder is not a race.”
I find it AMAZING that they quoted something that Robert actually said vs something completely made up, which is usually the case.
Now if they could only UNDERSTAND and accept the truth…
gravenimage says
True, Angus. This is actually a rarity.
Notice that no one here actually has an argument against what he has said–but then, Neo-Fascists don’t believe they need one…
Westman says
Stanford University is named after one of the “Robber Barons” of the US who created it and injected today’s equivalent of $1 billion into it. He profited from everything related to the building of the railroad including the creation of a shipline to bring in cheap Chinese labor. Ring any bells?
And here is what Leland Stanford had to say about Chinese laborers remaining after the railroad was completed:
“The presence of numbers of that degraded and distinct people would exercise a deleterious effect upon the superior race.” – Leland Stanford
Stanford University is named after a racist!
So where are the Stanford SJW’s to agitate for the name to be changed? Is there a statue of Leland Stanford on campus that they can tear down? One can be certain they voiced support for tearing down confederate statues and have a racist statue on their own campus!
Let’s look further – the remains of one of Califonia’s foremost racists are in the Stanford Mausoleum on the campus of Stanford University!
And along comes someone who merely points out the problems with a “religious” ideology, rather than a race of people, and Stanfordites call him……a racist.
Charles says
“I will not continue (sic) hate speech on this campus” –Student.
Hopefully, never mind learning some politics, this juvenile might pick up some correct English before he graduates..
LB says
Here’s a local news report of what happened at the event if anyone’s interested:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyNLUsgaS7E
solsticewitch13 says
They have absolutely NO CLUE!!!
JawsV says
That little girl doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Oh, “not what’s inside” (meaning RS). Oh, really? You little dumbsh*t. Apparently the Stanford fascists get to decide who gets free speech and who doesn’t. It’s straight out of “Animal Farm.”
JawsV says
That little girl doesn’t know what she’s talking about. She should go back to her playpen and suck on her pacifier. Pitiful college-age snowflakes.
vlparker says
Dumb as dirt. This is what you get after a lifetime of indoctrination by leftist schools. The young lady is so stupid and so ignorant of history that she thinks she is doing something noble. She is what she claims Mr. Spencer to be.
Ted Tyler says
So why did most of the students get up part way through the talk and depart. I assume that this was a planned exodus far in advance of the talk – so whatever was said would have no effect. Or (and this is very unlikely) Robert said something that was true that the leftist believers did not like.
JawsV says
I think the latter. Robert was making sense and they couldn’t stand it. I think it’s very likely.
RonaldB says
This is part of the war against comedy. The snowflakes are a parody of their own actions.
More to the point, the audience obviously had their fingers in their ears, simply looking to their watches to stand up and leave at the appointed (annointed?) time. These students are no more capable of absorbing a reasonable argument than a dog. It’s like Americans are evolving into two species.
The question is, why dump humongous amounts of tax money into “educational” institutions that do no more than serve as holding camps to keep the jobless stats lower than they really are. It’s obvious there is no learning or education whatsoever at such universities.
carol says
I can’t help thinking of a visual in one of Raymond Ibrahim’s last posts – live, orange-suited men suspended on a rope with gasoline alighted underneath their heads. Guess this is not quite the “respecting” culture Ms. Snowflake is imagining exists and/or will be influenced by her brave show of purported virtue.
Mr. Ibraham has another good article out today and it makes excellent comments about our enabling traitors FROM WITHIN. Someone made a “strawman” of his last article and he refutes the false depiction of same in this piece:
Luther, Islam and the LIES THAT CRIPPLE
http://raymondibrahim.com/2017/11/15/luther-islam-lies-cripple/
The comments most relevant to the Spencer article above begin almost halfway down at the paragraph beginning: “As for the second most important lesson…”
Gen Jones says
What’s with the premade KKK signs? Robert has nothing to do with the KKK or white supremacy. It’s totally disingenuous to link them. Are these students too stupid to know the difference between Robert and Richard? And we’re expecting them to read actual books. Some with big words. Oh dear.
Custos Custodum says
If you spend time hanging out on the left fringes of the Democratic Party as these left-Fascists obviously did, the party’s KKK heritage and addiction to violence is never far below the surface.
M says
I was thinking a lot of them really are too lazy to understand its Robert not Richard! Mental laziness seems pretty common among the left ?
James Dinwiddie says
Those of us who came to see and hear Robert Spencer’s ideas and were disallowed into the auditorium were shocked and repelled by the actions of Stanford’s self-elected thought police.
This was a demonstration of the most selfish and narrow-minded bigotry – worthy of a fascist state – that has no place in an American academy.
The Stanford faculty who signed the “Letter from faculty and others regarding Robert Spencer”,
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2017/11/14/letter-from-faculty-and-others-regarding-robert-spencer/
are, in my opinion, sorely misguided by their prejudgments and uninformed attitudes. As someone who has both studied and lived in Islamic countries, and who encounters refugees from “Islamic conditions” daily, I encourage these academics to consider their own plea:
“For us, this means taking seriously the lived experience of the people most impacted by racism, bigotry, hate speech and xenophobia.”
This “lived experience” perfectly describes the millions of hostage peoples living under “Islamic conditions”, of which Americans are barely aware. The empathy and advocacy for freedom of these Stanford academics, instead of preventing free speech and shared ideas in the academy, should extend to those enslaved by a totalitarian ideology in the form of state-sponsored theocratic oppression.
Ted Tyler says
My reading of the “letter from faculty” is as follows:
“Robert Spencer is a very bad person who creates fear and terror in the hearts of Muslims. We have no evidence for this – but we hear it a lot from a multitude of mystery sources so it must be true. Therefore we don’t want Robert Spencer to speak here”.
So we have a huge question here: Where is the Stanford Faculty getting their information?
Cicero says
It is clear that when the Neo grouches stood up to leave there was a time least half of the audience still seated. This means that there was an audience who were interested to hear what Robert Spencer had to say.
It is regrettable they were not allowed back I totheauditorium to continue the conversation
Kay says
Well, it sounds like they heard 20 minutes or so. May the few words they heard Robert speak ccme back to them in their sleep and wake them up.
Now—
Will they indeed invite and listen to Ayaan Hirsi Ali?
Will they show such organization and bravery to stand against real anti-Semitism?
Will they come to understand that they don’t know everything?
gravenimage says
Thank you for the link, LB.
Sons of Liberty says
I’m disgusted with what many of our colleges and universities have become today . They are not centers of LEARNING but have become Marxist indoctrination camps. Students are not allowed to hear a wide variety of viewpoints and then engage in intellectual discussion . Instead they keep our young people ignorant and pampered. Our Founding Fathers lived during the Age of Enlightenment and they proved their enlightened and informed ways by establishing a Republic based on LIBERTY and opportunity . One of our great Founding Fathers , Benjamin Franklin once said ” The Constitution does not guarantee happiness ….only the pursuit of it ” Stanford’s administration in their concerted effort to keep their snowflakes happy in a SAFE SPACE have kept them from hearing Robert Spencer’s informed speech about the coming portent where they will be anything but safe.
Diane Harvey says
Among the many advantages that the concept of Americanism gave to those who populated the 50 states was one we colloquially called a Sense of Fair Play.
Stanford has certainly done its part in crushing this.
gravenimage says
Grimly true, Diane.
Eric Inman says
You could request Oathkeepers.org to assist with the fascists next time… (It’s another proud member of the ‘organizations we hate’ club, at the SPLC.)
religionofpeace says
Unbelievable, I thought Stanford is an academic university that reveals truth. Stanford just proves me wrong.
Larry says
It is all going to get much, much worse before things get any better.
Cicero says
Unfortunately I must agree .
Europe is lost . UK is lost
USA is the current battleground
Yo Robert. We support you!
old white guy says
they are what they claim to be against.
Goutam says
“Accuse the other side of the crime that you are guilty of” – once of the key strategies of the high priest of propaganda art – Joseph Goebbels.
The pseudo-liberal ecosystem has mastered this trick and playing it to perfection.
Keys says
Yes, evil has a vile playbook. These students are learnng community organization Sal Alinsky style.
When sides use these same techniques against one another it will ultimately lead to war. The end justifies any means to achieve it.
Sons of Liberty says
Exactly, Goutam ! The Democrats are accusing Trump of EXACTLY what they WERE IN ENGAGED IN ,…..Russian collusion …ala the Uranium One bribery and concealment scandal where Obama and Hillary handed over 20% of our Uranium resources to PUTIN . Joseph Goebbels would be proud of the Democrat Party today.
gravenimage says
Grimly true, Goutam.
M says
Didn’t HRC do her THESIS on Saul Alinsky? I don’t understand the lefts willingness to use underhanded tactics and lies like Goebbels and alinsky.
PRCS says
That our future leaders apparently don’t realize that should concern us all.
kessler says
Disgusting. What arguments were used for not letting supporters of Robert in? outrageous – heads should be rolling after this
John Forbes says
Is this not a university ??? Little can be said for people like this! Best to close the place!
Dennis Dean says
This is whats going on in our colleges today, young people who don’t have a clue what their talking or protesting about. The very people who don’t like what a speaker is talking about, claiming their not against freedom of speech, while walking out complaining about that speech is both dishonest and laughable. “they have to go to their safe space with their blanky. This is what our colleges are putting of due to marxist, socialist professors. Parents need to pay attention, get engaged with their childrens education, know whats going on in the classroom. It’s crucial to the educational health of our children, and country. Parents WAKE UP! GET ENGAGED BEFORE WE LOSE GENERATIONS OF YOUNG IMPRESSIONIST MINDS TO FOLLY.
Karl S. says
As Spencer said in an earlier post, Stanford is a beautiful campus. Sadly, the niceties end there. What a shame that mere mention of Islam’s dark reality is considered offensive and, laughably, “racist” at a supposedly premier university.
St. Manuel II Palaiologos says
Karl Marx is all that they’re taught at University nowadays, not reality.
unfortunately says
I’m very sorry that this happened to you, and I’m ashamed that they wouldn’t let others in a cowardly attempt to shut you down.
We are too immature, clearly, to listen peaceably to another’s opinions. I didn’t invite Samantha Bee onto campus. Nor did I invite Trevor Noah. I despise both of their victim ideologies, but I don’t suddenly turn savage and crazed.
Funny how the only people expected to “tolerate” speech are the people who disagree with the massively overwhelming liberal opinion.
Thanks again for visiting. We truly appreciate it – if not now, then maybe later.
Best from Stanford.
Ted Tyler says
I also did not invite Samantha Bee or Trevor Noah onto campus – but I might have if I could have – to see what they have to say.
Benedict says
The peaceful way the students walked out on Robert Spencer was commendable. Preventing others waiting outside from entering the auditorium in order to listen to Roberts Spencer was repulsive.
Had the students outside been sifted for well reasoned students critical of Robert Spencer and other students who just might be interested in his perspectives, so that only “racists”, “islamophobes” etc., who needed to be kept away from further indoctrination, were left waiting?
And who did the vetting in that case?
gravenimage says
Thank you, unfortunately.
John S. Obeda says
Dear unfortunately, God bless you to want to learn the truth and the love for people to tell the truth to others and then God bless you with the stamina needed to withstand the consequences of daring to believe the truth and to tell it to others. Think of Jesus. And God bless Mr. Spencer and the other warriors of the truth. If the truth concerning the doctrine and the ways of Islam is not taught to the American people, then there is no reason why God would not permit the United States to fall.
I wonder about leftists says
Same old story at Stanford and most Universities. They do not want to debate Robert Spencer, because they know that they will lose the debate, + they don’t want to hear the truth, that’s why they don’t let anybody from outside in. They have the same methods as Muslims.But what can you expect more?
Was watching Ben Shapiro speaking at some university, funded by Quatar, he went through the same thing, students walked on stage with a big red flag, students shouting, he first tried to continue and then at a certain point he put 2 middle fingers in the air. It was such a mess, and staff nor security did anything.
I was not even there, but I felt so ashamed. Those young punks who are yelling and screaming about something they do not have a clou about. I don’t know any more, what is the USA today, what has it come to?
Like Charles wrote in another post, lots of money must have been paid to God knows whom. An enormous amount from very rich countries and people. Because this too, when you come to think about it, where did all those “refugees” get all the money for them and their families to pay for the trip to the USA, Europe, and the other Western countries. I know that a lot of our own people could not afford to travel to north Africa, and then you know that these are not poor refugees, because by only having the money for a whole family, in those countries, where the people are so “poor” for them that travel money is quite a sum. There is a big thing happening, much more than we think, but our God of whom we are part of, is watching and God is soft as butter, but hard as nails, which is a good thing, as with God you can not merchandise, as He only is, and I am that I am. Most important words in your life.
But I will continue to defend the freedom of speech and the freedom in how to dress, and the freedom what to eat and when and I take the freedom not to be oppressed by a violent Religion and to like a religion I like ,or not any religion at all.
Cicero says
There is a pattern to Muslim Migration to the non- Muslim West .
There are 57 Islamic countries in the world. Why are these illegal migrants not travelling t9 those countries?
Just think about that question for a second
Indeed where are these Muslim “children”and families getting the monies to fund their HIJRAH to the West. Who is organising the migration.?Who are coordinating the traffickers ? Who are funding their boats and selecting the traffickers? Who is studying the outcomes to their efforts and investment into the Human Trafficking of muslims in5eir hundreds of thousands to the West.
gravenimage says
Yes–this is a Muslim invasion into the West.
emmett says
IF FOUR OR EIGHT YEARS OF PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES NOT TAKE CARE OF THIS STALINIST GARBAGE SCUM SUPPORTING THE JIHAD, I WILL SUPPORT THE BLOOD DRENCHED MILITARY OVER THROW OF THIS STALINIST GARBAGE !!!!
warren raymond says
So that’s it? The fascists got in, walked out and those who wanted to hear Spencer speak couldn’t get in? This has to be taken to a higher level. WTF is going on in American universities?
Georg says
It really seems past due this stuff be dealt with in court. We had here not just the expected (a sad thing to be assured of in what is supposed to be a center of debate and exchange) attack on the freedom of speech, with the effect of Robert being denied his right to speech, but an attack on freedom of assembly. The forefathers did not have in mind that if an entity dislikes one’s point of view he/she can expect to speak only to an empty room with those desiring to hear being corralled elsewhere. Feels goofy to even have to point this out — especially when it is occurring at an institution which until now was held in the highest of esteem not just in academia but the wider public and even world.
Graeme Howarth says
It sounds to me like “Neo Brownshirts” according to the video in the article you linked to.
How very peculiar. Not permitting people in to hear you? Extremely unethical, unprofessional and unscholarly of the authorities.
I am frankly amazed. I know I shouldn’t be as you’d be providing ample evidence of their myopia and had been saying something like this was going to happen. But still, I couldn’t believe that such a depth of ignorance could be possible at a leading North American University.
Boy was I ever wrong. This is atrocious. They really are propagandising there, not producing independent thinkers.
This is an outright tragedy.
Georg says
I sympathize with your dissonance in having to regularly see that which seems unbelievable. It is frightening that this generation, even at a prestigious institution, does not seem to either understand or value the First Amendment. It is the very bedrock of our civics without which we risk ending up being subject to the whim of some few.
Demsci says
About the Brown shirts; indeed. Historically speaking these students are in the company of 1932-Nazi parlementarians! You see, in 1932 the Nazi party was the biggest one in German parliament (Reichstag). But they were not yet governing. They frequently paralysed the proceedings in the parliament by walking with their group out of the parliament meetings!
RichardL says
I bet this will have consequences that the people who organised this event won’t like: a debate about islam and free speech. This is much more beneficial to Robert’s and our cause than another speech to a few hundred people. Breitbart will be on it, Fox, too, I bet. Robert’s intellectual fight against jihad will be embedded in the fight for freedom of expression.
Stanford, the erstwhile defender of free speech, cannot engage in a rational and civil debate. That is just too much hypocrisy for sane people to overlook.
Thank you, Robert for your courage! I am happy that our fears for your physical safety were unfounded. This time.
gravenimage says
+1
Emanuele Ciriachi says
The Stanford students who stages this protest are a bunch of fascists and intolerant ignorants – your average left-wing brownshirt.
The accusations of “racism” and especially, the nonsensical word that is “islamophobia” are made-up lies that remain to this day completely unsubstantiated. And the Stanford Administration has failed to enforce its own policy against disruption of speakers at the event.
It’s just another day of leftist dictatorship at the university. Thank you Robert Spencer for doing your part in exposing this!
Rainer Boegle says
This is really really awful, especially from a supposed “academic institution” that should expose their students to all kinds of ideas, especially if they want to encourage critical thinking.
Michael Copeland says
“Those espousing hatred can’t have a platform on this campus,” said student Jana Kholy.
Will student Jana Kholy stand by her words?
“You should hate them, disown them and their religion and be proud of your religion.”
From Alminbar.com
“Allah (SWT) tells you to … hate those whom He tells you to hate … Therefore you must love the Muslims … and hate the kuffaar … .”
From Muslims Against Voting
“There has already been for you an excellent pattern … between us and you enmity and hatred forever…”
Koran 60:4, part of Islamic law
https://libertygb.org.uk/news/islam-instructs-hatred-muslims-speak
Fred H says
if the snowflakes would have been so traumatized by this event, why did they actually attend it? Just wondering…
Ursus Arctos says
To prevent Mr. Spencer from having a voice & to prevent others from hearing it. Page 1 on the Fascist playbook.
carol says
Right! At first it seemed they were trying to give the impression they’d listened intelligently and THEN rejected wholeheartedly (like swarming insects). But the more important reason they were there front row was to keep the good minds and their butts out of the seats.
gravenimage says
True, carol. It was intended to keep out anyone who would so much as listen to what Robert Spencer had to say.
Yokel says
My guess is that they plotted with the college administrators. [After this display I refuse to call the establishment a University!] I suggest that the agreement was no-one will be allowed into the event after the room is full and the speaker is ready to start. The snowflakes then organised a room full of their own to displace everyone else. Then they departed once they were sure that it would leave an empty room for Robert to speak to.
I know no more than what I have read, and what I experienced while watching the antics of the Socialist Society [SocSoc to its mates] in action when I attended University in the early 1970s.
Jim says
Yokel, ditto. Were I there I wonder how they would have prevented me from entering. There had to have been an implicit threat of violence, which, ironically, it is something they claim to be against. I’d like to know more about how they prevented people from entering. This article does not go into that interesting detail, unfortunately.
Also there must have been some collusion to get them all up at once and to leave at the same time. Does not appear spontaneous, but preplanned. I’ve got no problem with them leaving, but it seem civil rights were denied to those who wanted to get in to actually listen to Mr Spencer.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Yokel and Jim. Without collusion, it could not have been coordinated, nor could those who walked out have been so much of the audience, considering how many people were waiting to get in.
The decision to prevent any of those waiting to get in from hearing Robert Spencer was likely made ahead of time, as well.
Jim says
Graven, “made ahead of time.” My point exactly.
Gary says
Bevis and Butthead go to college.
Bill says
I think it is more like “Bevis and Butthead operate a college”. At least there are no reports of physical violence surrounding the event.
I maintain that conservative students might have a class action suit against the University for breach of contract and fraud due to the selective enforcement of rules by the University against conservative students and the knowing and intentional fraud committed against the students by inducing students to attend Stanford based on false representations of an open and inclusive environment and then knowingly failing to provide it.
Where is a good lawyer when you need one.
gravenimage says
Yes–at least their was no overt violence from these neo-Fascists. That’s the best you can say.
Ted Tyler says
If people have an idea that is firmly chiseled into their mind, then stating facts that conflict with that idea will not change that idea as the person doubles down to protect the idea. To quote from the Koran and use the phrase: “..let Allah speak for me..” will only anger the group. It may be that nothing Robert could have said would have any effect on the group – since its mission was to disrupt the talk. However, a better approach might have been to start the talk with things that we can all agree on. Another way is to start by telling a story. Perhaps: “Have any of you heard of Thomas Jefferson? Do you know about him?…….”
Gary says
Great point Ted. However; reading “Killing England” is probably not accepted literature within the “hallowed halls” of Stanford University.
So no,(Unfortunately), they’ve probably never heard of Thomas Jefferson.
vyx says
In theory, that’s a good idea, but I’m pretty sure the founding fathers are considered evil.
The only way that Robert could make his lecture acceptable is to somehow couch it in terms of Marx and Lenin, and then, as soon as he got to the truth, they would still have rejected the message and left the room.
The university system is doing a good job of churning out brain dead conformist liberals who, when they are in power in the future, will be happy to crush any dissent to their ideas. Sad.
carol says
Stefan Molyneux seems to say the same in his series “Bomb in the Brain”. Seems our unconscious is calling the shots before we make a move. Nonetheless I’m sure our efforts are not wasted. His series might suggest other methods however (particularly “DON’T let them ‘get them while they’re young”‘”.
Jim says
He could have started off with an Italian opera and it wouldn’t have mattered. When you see them all get up at once and leave, it’s obvious that it was planned beforehand. They weren’t there to listen. They were there to occupy seats so other people who wanted to listen couldn’t. They were there to disrupt from the get-go,
gravenimage says
Exactly, Jim.
Georg says
“The Stanford administration also barred the Young America’s Foundation from streaming the event. The reason behind that was clear: they didn’t want the behavior of Stanford students to be exposed before the world. They knew what was coming, and they supported it.”
Exactly right. There needs to be more elucidation of the *intentions* of the left/red-green alliance. And it is nothing less than criminal to proclaim Robert Spencer a racist without providing a shred of evidence. Even the suggestion, given the body of his work, is ludicrous.
As far as “offensive” speech goes, this ought to be well-shy of anything causing hysteria. These students are not prepared to come to terms with the domain of debate which the circumstances of the world call for. Coming to understand Islam is a dangerous doctrine is an intellectual softball. And these students’ proclaimed concerns over bigotry and hate are easily shown to be specious as the Koran is brimming over with bigotry and hate yet they won’t even let someone else speak about it, let alone condemn it as they must if they are to consider themselves moral beings.
Stanford and so many other Western institutions are far out into the wilderness on the issue of Islam and it’s coming to imperil our civilization.
Roy King - NJ says
I wonder who organized the students who walked out. Common sense says they should have had less than half the seats, if they were requested by supporters, protestors and impartial observers. Were any employees of Stanford involved in this distribution of seats? Did the school know about the planned walkout?
gravenimage says
Damn good questions, Roy.
Dacritic says
I find it ironic that the idiots who complain against “hate” would actually support the worst theology of hate of them all.
Georg says
It’s the prevailing irony of this entire phenomenon.
JawsV says
Total irony.
Jim T says
Narrow is the mind and life of the self righteous fool. Keep banging the drum Robert Spencer
Gary says
“I will not continue hate speech on this campus,” said one student.
Noting that they kept others from attending, it sounds more like what the student should have said was….
“I will not allow free speech.”
This warning seems appropriate….
“Flee the evil desires of youth and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. Don’t have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.”
Free speech? Or captive to do Satan’s will? You decide.
Luis says
I find it interesting that the current political climate can be summed up in the few words of Ecclesiastes 10:2: “The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.”
John S. Obeda says
Gary, it’s a fine passage that you have quoted: 2 Timothy 2:22. And the apostle Paul wrote it to the young pastor Timothy who already was a Christian, a faithful follower of the Lord Jesus. If the students at Stanford would be faithful believers in the Lord Jesus, their God and Saviour, they would have behaved themselves and free speech would have prevailed and it would have been a good event for everyone. And I believe that the more the American people separate themselves from Jesus and His teaching, the worse it’s going to get in the States; same in other democratic countries.
Dave says
I tried the YAF stream and as noted YAF was not allowed to stream the event.
Time to ask what is a university if it does not defend and support free speech and assembly?
Stanford is rewarding those it favors over those it opposes in its administration of speaking privileges that can be arbitrary granted or denied by the administration. Not exactly my fathers America anymore, is it?
I hope there are grounds for suing.
Dave says
NBC Bay Area coverage :
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Stanford-Students-Walk-Out-Protest-During-Robert-Spencer-Speaking-Event-457635203.html
Dum Spiro says
Thanks for the link. Too bad NBC didn’t make the Hillary-sized crowd that stayed for the talk look bigger!
I’m looking forward to watching Robert’s full presentation. It was recorded, wasn’t it?
— Spero
Jeff Allen says
Here is the only comment submitted to NBC regarding the Stanford travesty:
Stewart Hayes
Wafa Sultan and Ayaan Hersi Ali speak out against the problems in Islam that promote violence and Jihad. Robert Spencer does the same and quotes the regligious texts of Islam: Quran, Hadith, Sira. He merely quotes what is in these books he did not write them. Is there any debate about this problem that Islam has? Even the president of Egypt says Islam has a problem. Why then would Stanford effectivly allow this event to be shut down? I am very ashamed of my Alma mater.
gravenimage says
NBC is pretending this walkout was spontaneous.
rico says
Stanford – leading the way for the introduction of Sharia blasphemy laws
Bodega says
Coming from a family that settled into northern California in the late 1700’s early 1800’s and who fought in the American Revolution and “won”, I find the California of today to be disgusting. We fought for freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, right to bear arms and it is all being thrown away as if dirt from the kitchen floor.
I wonder if there is a Stanford student who knows anything about a) our early American history, b) our Constitution, c) our Bill of Rights or what the word “veteran” means?
I think this particular university should be shuttered, all faculty fired and when and if reopened, the faculty vetted to determine if they understood and used deductive reasoning.
Ted Tyler says
I wonder, might there be some confusion between Robert Spencer and Richard Spencer?
JawsV says
It’s a damn shame they have the same last name.
Mary says
I think there is confusion between the two individuals. The only thing they share is a similar common surname. Robert Spencer’s ancestors are from the Middle East, being the descendant of Christian immigrants from Turkey (See Robert Spencer article in Wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Spencer_(author)
gravenimage says
Maybe, Ted–but many hate Robert Spencer purely because he opposes violent Jihad, and not because they have confused him with an actual racist.
Norger says
It’s disgraceful, but when you are incapable of prevailing in a substantive exchange, this is the kind of stuff you do. Only one polnt of view is allowed at Stanford.
Ted Tyler says
“when you are incapable of prevailing in a substantive exchange, this is the kind of stuff you do”
Excellent point. Very true.
gravenimage says
Exactly, Norger.
MFritz says
Stanford’s administration has been the problem since day one. Cut public funding until this problem is fixed.
rubiconcrest says
I hope the Young republicans sue the university to get their money back and host Robert again at a larger venue in the near future.
Peter says
Stanford stands for:
Stanford Perversity (it is not a genuine university any more)
Its newspaper:
Stanford Revisionist (or was it Stanford Delusionist?)
The federal government should cease all funding of American institutions of ostensibly “higher education” that have become leftist, neo-Marxist indoctrination centers.
If the Ivy League institutions (aka indoctrination centers or reeducation camps) get more federal funds that quite a few U.S. states, then it is time for them to live off their endowments, not the public tit.
Ted Tyler says
A thought: Charge a $20 admission fee with the proceeds going to a homeless shelter for battered women. Then begin the talk with:
“My, what a lovely group of young, bright, highly intelligent students that I see before me. It is obvious that you are all intensely interested in learning. Now let me ask you, by a show of hands, is there anyone here who is actually wants to hear anything that I have to say?”
If hands go up, then Robert proceeds with the talk. If no hands go up, then Robert simply states “The homeless shelter thanks you for your contribution” – and walks off the stage.
Ursus Arctos says
Ha ha! I like it!
mgoldberg says
How sad the state of the university today. That the administration would indeed aide and assist the
fascists, baring any event from occuring is indeed frightening in an of itself. They will deny any such responsibility, and that too is simply scurrilous.
No event took place, from what was reported. No intellectual discussion, no debate, no reason for the University to exist.
Matthew Bracken says
Folks of our generation often wonder where these little SJW thugs will ever find employment, with their degrees in Queer Racial Theory. The scary thing is that they will find jobs within the DOJ, IRS, FBI etc. It’s no coincidence that an FBI agent followed the would-be Garland TX jihad killers in his own car, while encouraging them to commit a massacre, without warning Robert or the others at the event. Expect to see more and worse behavior by agents of the federal govt as their ranks are increasing filled by these intolerant Leftist creeps.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Agreed. Soon, some of these baby fascists will grow up into big harder fascists. If they aren’t outweighed by sensible people in positions of authority, we can expect the power of the state to be used instead of just a walk out.
solsticewitch13 says
they utterly have NO clue,, future slaves and forced conversions,,,,
JawsV says
They’re called useful idiots.
gravenimage says
Useful idiots indeed.
JawsV says
They’re called useful idiots.
mortimer says
The Stanford directors must be forced by the federal government to uphold freedom of expression.
A new policy of protecting speakers from intimidation must be put in place.
vyx says
And if they don’t abide by freedom of speech rules:
1. A huge fine from the government for the first offense
2. After that, Federal grants go away for each subsequent offense.
Take away their precious money, and see how their attitudes will change.
Norger says
I am reminded again of Georg’s post yesterday to the effect that they veil their fear of debate as virtue, and that they simply refuse to have any discussion about the obvious connection between Islamic theology and Islamic terrorism. This is not a topic which is considered acceptable to be discussed at Stanford; it cannot and must not be allowed. And they are no doubt congratulating themselves today for having “won,”
Ursus Arctos says
When I was young I was always told that those who were admitted into prestigious universities were the “best of the best of us”; the most intelligent; the most intellectually fearless. I can feel my mother rolling over in her grave with the behaviour of the Stanford staff & students. Bunch of cowards! She once said to me, “If you don’t like someone’s ideas, then counter them with better ones. Don’t ever shut someone up, or take away their voice, simply because you don’t like what they say.” If Stanford is the best of the best of us, then it’s true what someone else here on JihadWatch had said about a German proverb that went: a fish rots from the head down.
I had a friend in high school who’s father was a soldier in the German army in World War II & I remember a conversation I once had with him when I asked him how the Nazis were able to gain power in Germany, in Germany of all places?!; he said that there were many reasons, none good, but that the one of the first things that the National Socialists did was to quash dissent. To shut up dissenting voices & differing opinions; then, when they were finally in positions of power, to jail or deport or to kill those who dissented. When I compare in my mind how different the intellectual culture was in the ’70s (when I was a teenager) to what it is now… want to cry. At the very least dissenting voices could be clearly heard, & not shut out.
When I was in Sweden a few months ago, I was speaking to a tour guide & the conversation got to the Muslim immigration (“invasion” was the word she used) & said to me, “Swedes are too afraid to speak. Sweden’s finished.” When I think of Sweden, M103 here in Canada, “no go zones”, “Islamophobia”, etc…. then maybe it’s true. Maybe Western Civilization, the Enlightenment, & the experiment in liberal democracy IS finished & on its last legs?
The cowardly Stanford students & staff have shown me just how advanced the rot of the fish is.
Shmoovie says
The ‘scary’ bullies and their babysitter admins are more exposed each time they pull something like this. They may be feeling all victorious and patting each other’s backs this AM– but what they did took nothing near TRUE courage. They punked out and stopped anyone from listening to a speaker they don’t want heard– rather than let the speech go on, THEN have a TRUE debate over the subject. Can smell the cowardice from here.
We started learning about 30s Euro fascism in sixth grade; these brats haven’t a clue how similar they are to those brownshirted book-burners.
Is it possible that every single person, worldwide and of every skin color, who is questioning or speaking against islam, is doing so for “racist”/bigoted reasons? Is there NO intellectual curiosity in these students, that they might sneak away from the crowd and look into the claims themselves?
A bunch of CLOSED minds hobbled together, praising themselves. Reminds one of the mobs who’d get together at night for a bit of lynching.
Guy Macher says
I’m writing Stanford out of my will.
Westman says
I had hoped that Stanford would be a cut above Berkeley, encouraging a decorum befitting the highest standards for those attending, rather than an emotional mob whose minds could not investigate other ideas.
It is important to remember these disruptive students and their promoting faculty members are but a minority of the students and faculty of the university – in fact the most vociferous are those sustained adolescents who live on campus and do not work. For them, mob rule is just a diversion away from study while the majority of the serious students have busy, responsible lives off-campus or are heavily engaged in their educational pursuits and projects.
The real traitors to democracy and higher education are the faculty members who promoted this behavior, again, a minority.
A long-term consequence of such behavior is the encouragement of forces that may ultimately take hold of these campus radicals, as happened in Iran, and take the nation in a direction the students and universities would dearly regret. Such uninformed behavior also emboldens foreign enemies who clearly see these students would not fight or sacrifice to preserve their nation.
It might be wiser to hold these presentations off-campus where radical campus dwellers, living off the income of others, must make some effort to attend.
The “activist” students are demonstrating a “1984” group-think attitude that is a hybrid of communism, entitlement, and desperate control of what others are allowed to hear. These are the seeds of revolution. Is there a new “Bolshevik Revolution” forming on campus?
Ursus Arctos says
To paraphrase Pamela Geller, “The majority are irrelevant.”
RodSerling says
Wow, couldn’t access the site, again. Has anyone else had trouble accessing Jihadwatch over the past couple of days?
These zombified “students'” behaviour is disgusting. Most haven’t got a clue about the substance of either Robert’s work or Islamic doctrine, and the few who do are either brainwashed or malevolent.
Jim says
“Has anyone else had trouble accessing Jihadwatch over the past couple of days?”
Not I.
John S. Obeda says
Sunday afternoon the pages were blank, all white. Since Monday it’s okay. This is in Southwest Ontario.
brane pilot says
Robert Spencer is the canary in the coal mine and it is laying dead on the bottom of the cage.
A demographic bulldozer fueled by mass immigration has been set into motion that is unstoppable. Saudi money in US and European ivy league social science departments since the 1960s has reaped ideological victories that I am sure exceed the wildest dreams of those who came up with the ploy. Fundamentalist Islamic money has successfully funded an ideological revolution in academia that now has Islamists, atheists and sexual deviants dictating the primary school curriculum in the US and Europe and, soon to follow, the political environment.
Disgusting as the behavior of the present crop of academics is, they will be the future so-called leaders of America. As in Europe, they will be voted in by an unassailable open-borders voting block of recent immigrants and virtue-signaling useful idiots. The world of a decade from now will bear no resemblance to the world of today. The fight to preserve this civilization is finished.
What will replace the West as it has been known for centuries is the question. But the West, as it was, is lost.
Ted Tyler says
Brane, I agree with most of what you said, but, as you might expect, I object to your grouping Atheists with Islamists and Sexual Deviants.
brane pilot says
When a group who represents a tiny fraction of the population lawyers up to force the vast majority to abandon cultural practices that have provided comfort, stability and guidance for centuries, I have a big problem with that. It stands as written.
warren raymond says
2000 years of culture and civilisation, and this is the result?
Ed Lee says
Robert, have you thought about contacting Thomas Sowell, the Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and asking him what he thinks of this incident? I have followed Sowell’s writings for many years, and have always found that he boils any situation down to the basic key concepts, which most people do not think of. Even though he has retired from writing his weekly columns, I’m sure he has strong opinions on this situation.
Infidel says
Did u see the EVIL SMIRK on the face of that Muslim girl as the people walked out.. It was a SMIRK as to how they have made fools of the Libs again and used their shoulders to fire at the RIGHT.. Yes folks! Islam uses the Lib Left’s shoulders to fire on patriots and other nationalists.. But truth cannot be suppressed for long!!
Dave says
Yup I saw that too; like she couldn’t believe how gullible all these elite Stanford students were.
Isabellathecrusader says
Welcome to Nazi Germany.
Keys says
Evil is smug in its trickery and deceit.
Keys says
Evil parading as good with a multitude of those deceived.
Dr. John Moe says
Shame on you, Stanford! I expected that you would respect the idea of Free Speech, but instead you acted like fools and sheep.
Ashley says
Stanford University has brought shame to Stanford University. Orchestrating a walk out and preventing others access to the lecture hall? Really?
I trust that last night’s incident will, in time, bite Stanford in the ass. The university has shown its true colors and they aren’t pretty. The vast majority of Americans are concerned with radical Islam, sharia, and jihad. Stanford has now demonstrated that it is intolerant of free speech and inconvenient truths and facts.
Politicianphobia says
So now we have Islamophobics and Collaborators, I am proud to be Islamaphobic. Take up our quarrel with the foe, to you from failing hands, we throw the torch, be yours to hold on high, lest ye break faith with us who die.
Mark A says
The quote is from John McRae’s Flanders Fields and he was referring to “the dead.”
We, the living, have to take on this torch.
Ursus Arctos says
The intellectually dead as well it would seem.
Ursus Arctos says
Never mind that comment I just posted, I meant it another way… please disregard.
Gamaliel says
Why not make a video of the entire speech you were going to give and then have YAF distribute links to it with the statement “The video that the Stanford Administration barred you from seeing.” Have a little intro where you explain that Stanford wouldn’t let other people in the room.
Ted Tyler says
YES!! And please note at what point in the talk did the students decide to depart.
CM says
Dear Mr. Spencer,
So sorry to hear that these people acted childishly instead of listening to what you had to say. I guess they have no answers and only use bullying tactics as their answer. I had hoped it would have been a nice dialogue between you and them. I hope their bad behavior gets much attention in the media. Perhaps next time you get to speak at an event that is hostile like this, is to have the supporters come early and be in the room when you start up, so they won’t be locked out. Bring cameras! Even cell phone cameras are a good idea. Lock the doors after everyone is present, so there can be no walk out until you’re finished. Would that be a good idea?. I hope you don’t give up speaking the truth as is is so needed for everyone to hear,
Ursus Arctos says
I don’t think so. Just as you shouldn’t block people from entering, you shouldn’t block people from leaving. It is a free society we have, after all… at least for now.
Hugo Hackenbush says
Can’t. Fire codes.
John S. Obeda says
It would also be interesting to read what the city newspapers have to say and to read the letters to the editors.
Jim says
“the students who were spuriously claiming that they felt “threatened”” — “they refused to admit others who wanted to get in.” If they refuse to let anyone in, they must have been threatening to those who tried to enter by prohibiting them from entering.
As I said earlier, if you want to know what liberals are up to, just listen to what they accuse the opposition of doing, because that is what they are doing. Case in point. If one is prohibiting someone from entering, one is threatening violence by implication.
Hugo Hackenbush says
Mr. Spencer,
You have been called the “canary in the coal mine” giving warning about Islam as written. This is not accurate. It is worse than that. You are the CASSANDRA in the coal mine that no one on the Left wants to believe (and in some cases want to destroy for making noise).
Oh, and I hear that the name of the institution will now be changed from “STANford” to “SANford and Son: Purveyors of the finest intellectual JUNK”
Jim says
Everyone probably has seen the three monkeys, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Well, in Stanford there is one monkey, but it has 6 arms. Or is it eight arms, two more to block entrance prevent others from seeing or hearing that “evil”?
Ted Tyler says
Yes. Cassandra is a lot closer than canary.
Jim says
“Racism, bigotry isn’t welcome. Those espousing hatred can’t have a platform on this campus,” said student…
When asked if he was racist or Islamophobic, Spencer responded with laughter. “I’m neither one. Islam is not a race. Mass murder is not a race.”
As Mr Spencer said, Islam is not a race. It is, in fact, a system of belief which is written down and codified. What is bigotry? Is it not refusing to associate with someone based on ignorance? Mr Spencer has read the Koran and hadiths. He is not ignorant of the teachings of Islam, he knows his stuff. (I know because I have read them, too.) Has the student read every word of those books? I bet not. Now who’s the bigot?
BARBARA BROOKS says
Maybe the solution is to mobilize the alumni. Usually they are much more conservative than the professors and student activists. Since Stanford is private and depends on its alumni for support, the administration might change its behavior if the alums start pressuring them to allow free speech.
In fact, that strategy might work at most private colleges . . .
Ursus Arctos says
Oooh… that’s a good one!
Voytek Gagalka says
So what’s next? Stanford authorities preparing special test on admission to any newcomers asking if they ever listened to and/or read anything of Robert Spencer (and others whom they will include on their proscription list, courtesy of the SPLC)? And if they say ‘yes’ they’ll be automatically denied opportunity to study at that so called “university”? There is nothing universal in that institution anymore. Since they still pretend to be “public” institution and draw heavily from public purse (extorted (stolen) tax money), they deserve to lose that privilege, now more than ever! Outrageous circus of clowns!
Mark A says
Another demonstration of why there is a valid business case to be made for new, conservative universities.
Such institutions could be online. The Internet has the capability to deliver a professor’s lecture online rather than in a physical classroom.
When universities behave the way Stanford has here, there needs to be an alternative developed to current universities,
Rainer Boegle says
Well the internet model could work if accreditation can be done.
On the other hand traditional universities have more costs but also lots of income through tuition fees that are just outrageous.
Jayell says
So what’s with all this outrageous, hysterical defensive insecurity at Stanford? Mr. Spencer has clearly hit a raw nerve here, the same sort of raw nerve as you normally see in a devious criminal con-artist and fraudster when they’re about to be found out and their cover publicly blown. That’s exactly what Mr. Spencer has done here, and the more he blows the whistle on their nasty little attempt at mass deception and social/academic corruption, the more aggressive they will become to save their skins. They have clearly already broken the laws of academic propiety and decency, the next thing is to break the law of the land, although their friend in Iceland already tried that one on Mr. Spencer. How might they expect to get away with THAT?
mortimer says
A debate with any of these presumptuous know-nothings would be decided in one minute. Robert Spencer is one of the world’s best informed authorities on the topic of jihad.
Robert Spencer is the DEAN OF JIHADOLOGY.
Alice Hoagland says
https://www.stanforddaily.com/contact/
eic@stanforddaily.com
Dear Editor:
It is truly regrettable that certain students of this fine institution have brought shame upon themselves through their ungracious acts toward speaker Robert Spencer. Shutting out a respected scholar, an invited guest, because he holds peaceful views that contradict their own is indeed a fascist tactic, and unworthy of Stanford.
Alice Hoagland
Los Gatos, California
Mother of Mark Bingham, UCB Class of ’93, UA Flt. 93, September 11, 2001
Jack Diamond says
Fine words Ms. Hoagland. So very sorry about the loss of your son. He was one of the brave men who charged the cockpit of that plane on 9/11, a hero.
Maggy Read says
If those youth are the future of America, so America is already doomed.
Those people are unworthy to fight for or to spread any energy for…They ask for it so they deserve it, and they will get it.
In all cases the good people will be the victims of this dark destiny. The Muslim immigrants through all those years and their children, i mean the second and third generations of Muslim immigrants brainwashed their colleagues and friends at schools and universities with propaganda, those influenceable idiot young people who already learnt in academia to hate themselves, and their parents are already morally and spiritually empty. So they are an easy pray for those manipulative soldiers of Allah and their children, supported by the media, leftist organizations and politicians.
It’s the consequences of long years of Islamic immigrations, self loathing procedures, and entire culture of guilt, additional to this the petro-dollars coming from the wealthy Islamic countries.
Wellington says
You’re pathetic, Stanford.
eduardo odraude says
Like many universities, Stanford gets large tax advantages and other help from the federal government. If I’m not mistaken, Standford’s huge endowment funds, for example, are not taxed. Universities should be put on notice that students and administrators suppressing and not protecting free speech will mean loss of government grants and tax advantages.
Several aspects of the way the event was treated are offensive to free speech: after the walkout from the talk, the administration did not allow others to go in who actually wanted to hear the speaker; the administration forbade live streaming of the event; and Stanford publications hosted a smear campaign.
It appears that those who wanted to silence Spencer rather than debate him arranged to monopolize the seats and then arranged that after the walkout others who really wanted to hear could not get in to listen to him.
Norger says
Yes. As one of the posters on the Stanford Daily said, this is thought control. “We will not allow Spencer’s words to be spoken (much less debated) at Stanford, even to those persons who in fact wish to at least hear what Spencer has to say.” It is Orwellian and 1000% fascistic to the core.
Tim says
Down with the fascist Stanford students!
This does not mean all Stanford students.
Freedom of speech now!
Cheryl says
Pathetic intolerant entitlement babies. God help us, they are the future. Ignorance thrives amongst them in institutions of higher Hegelian dialect learning. They will be the first to die when the *hit hits the fan, as they huddle together. Too late to listen and learn then, boo hoo!
eduardo odraude says
One way to avoid much of this disruptive theater would be for universities’ conservative students to arrange for Spencer to have a formal, timed debate with an opponent representing “the other side”. Yes, some adversaries refuse to debate Spencer, but the students could find willing candidates. Leftist students would be less likely to engage in disruptive measures if, for example, in walking out they were walking out not only on Spencer but on his opponent. The administration would be less likely to keep people out of the event if in doing so an opposing debater were also being silenced. Arguably more students would end up being influenced than by the current solo presentation method. A debate format would bring Spencer’s views into the realm of actual thought and discussion. Right now, much of what he says is instead simply slandered and censored. A solo talk on a topic with such huge stakes inflames many of today’s “progressive” students so much that they refuse to endure an hour and a half presentation in which an opposing view is not also represented. Until universities can be compelled by law to protect free speech, then, a debate format seems strategically more effective than solo presentations on this subject.
Norger says
They wouldn’t allow that either. They’ve convinced themselves that Spencer is beneath contempt. Most of these people have no substantive knowledge of Islam and even less of Spencer but they know in their hearts that he must be silenced. That’s all that matters to them.
eduardo odraude says
Perhaps, but I think it should be tried. David Wood managed to have dozens of formal public debates with Muslims, without the least bit of disruption.
eduardo odraude says
My 3:12 comment is in response to Norger’s 2:03 comment.
Bradamante says
This makes me very sad. I’m fairly familiar with Stanford; I’m just a few miles away right now and even attended a month-long educational program at Stanford years ago. I thought that Stanford, of all places, would be a place where people could engage with ideas. If anyone had a serious disagreement with Robert Spencer, they could bring their sharpest counterarguments. But it’s just like the other places — there is no disagreement, because they have no idea what he was going to say. Yet somehow they’re certain that it was vitally important that they not stay to hear it, and that they prevent other people from hearing it as well. What a shame.
Norger says
“ I thought that Stanford, of all places, would be a place where people could engage with ideas. If anyone had a serious disagreement with Robert Spencer, they could bring their sharpest counterarguments.”
It’s much easier to defame Spencer, misrepresent his work, pretend that your moral superiority prohibits you from engaging with him. Then you prevent him from speaking and declare victory. If the audience were to listen or (heaven forbid) actually engage with him, some people might conclude that Spencer in fact has a deep understanding of Islamic theology and and that he actually raises any number of valid (and thought-provoking) points. THAT would be unacceptable,
Ted Tyler says
Norger, On many campuses there are a minority of leftist-Islamic students who have found that it is possible to silence the opposition and shut down debate. Now they have a new tool. No violent disruptions – just flood the room with plants whose mission is to depart in the middle to a talk. Since this tactic appears to work, I suspect that it will be used at other campuses in the near future.
Norger says
I have no doubt that this will be repeated.
gravenimage says
Bradamante, we are almost neighbors–I live in Oakland. Do you live in Palo Alto, or elsewhere on the peninsula?
Mary says
Several decades ago, I worked for Stanford University on the staff at the medical school. Later, I found out that my salary was funded from a grant from the United States Navy. Therefore, I have no loyalty to Stanford University, especially after the treatment given to ROBERT (NOT Richard) Spencer. I hope their football and other sports teams lose every contest and that alumni/ae stop contributing.
eduardo odraude says
I hope Robert started the talk by distinguishing himself from white supremacist Richard Spencer. I would not be surprised if many of the students had been led to confuse Richard Spencer with Robert Spencer.
Andino says
My Report:
I arrived at 6:40 to the location because John, of the Stanford College Republican group, suggested I get there by 7 in order to get a place in line as he knew it would be crowded. There was at least 200 people congregated near the entrance which was gated off. The entire perimeter of the building was heavily guarded with at least two different security guard agencies, possibly three (apex, sheriff and Stanford).
Concerned that I wouldn’t get in if I wasn’t near the front, I walked right up to the front area and waited. The crowd was more or less lounging around and no one was concerned that I walked up to the front. It was not a well organized ‘line’. I gave an interview with a woman from the Palo Alto daily expressing my interest in what RS has to say and my disappointment in the glaring misrepresentation of him by supposed journalists in the Stanford Daily leading up to the event.
At 7:15 the doors opened and we started to file in. The event had already been closed to the public so anyone who wasn’t a student or faculty had to be on the guest list. My estimation was that there was at most 50 people on the list (that I saw). There were separate lines for ‘guests’ and students. But all were subjected to the same verification and bag searching and given a wristband.
Once in the hall, I noticed that the capacity was around 232. Over the next hour the hall filled up and I couldn’t help wonder what was in store. Clearly, based on all the uproar preceding the event, not all participants were curious and interested. The mood was calm enough though and of course now I know why.
A few minutes after RS started speaking, music started playing from somewhere as an interruption. I couldn’t tell if it was coming from inside the venue or from right outside the window. Needless to say, Robert commented on it as he anticipated such antics. It was quieted down within a minute, I don’t know how. He continued and a few minutes later, probably about 10 minutes after he started the talk, and it must have been based on a pre-agreed upon time, about 180-190 students all got up and started filing out of the auditorium. (you can see that in the news video).
Robert spoke through their leaving and there was a small spat here and there between those leaving and those staying; with at least one stayer voicing their opinions that the leavers were fascist. For the most part the leavers were quiet and simple in their protest but there was the occasional excessive puerility of picture taking of the people staying as if assuming some righteous capturing of guilty parties.
Soon after they left, one woman interrupted Robert with a question which he graciously answered without commenting on her rudeness for interrupting. I don’t remember the content but the essence was that she was using a question to state her displeasure of Robert’s position and expression, etc. He patiently, yet forcefully, answered her query with clear references and citations as always, yet within a minute she gathered up her stuff and walked out, unable to hear anything that challenged her already made up mind.
With about 35-40 people left in the hall, Robert finished his talk. I’m not sure of the makeup of the crowd. There were still students, as well as obvious guests, and what looked like a group from the Stanford Republicans. It is unfortunate that there were others outside who couldn’t come in, but there couldn’t have been many since the guest list was limited and a vast majority of the students were only there in protest and not genuine interest.
The Q&A was interesting and some of the questions came from students who stayed and, though they obviously didn’t agree with Robert, I for one, appreciated their showing him the respect he deserved by listening to him speak and waiting for the Q&A to challenge their understanding. It is questionable whether Robert got through to them as they were fixated on separating Islamic doctrine with the individual practice of Islam (in hopes of reducing some of the cognitive dissonance inherent in identifying as a Muslim and hearing Robert communicate the depth of the intolerance that the doctrine has). But Robert couldn’t help them with their identity issues because his point was to simply reveal that the Islamic ideology, according to all the schools and authorities that are sanctioned to clarify the meaning of the various texts, point to an intolerant and subjugating religion. He validated to those students that not all practicing Muslims adhere strictly to the code, thankfully, but that there is no getting around the fact that the ideology fundamentally advocates violence to nonbelievers (not to mention the suppression of women, the murdering of homosexuals, etc).
Upon leaving, after it was over, I was walking in the direction of the gathering of students who had congregated outside after walking out of the hall. Being the curious guy that I am, I walked up to the outside of the group that were all gathered around a young lady speaking through a microphone in the center of the group. I listened for a few moments, and observed everyone with their signs that they were holding. I felt a combination of disdain and pity for them. The irony was too rich. There was no need to argue or make a point like they were so determined to do. The atmosphere was filled with ‘group think’, and the need to feel accepted, such that any critical analysis of difference and differentiation was lost from their minds. But it’s not unlike any group of people who has to confront the uncomfortable truth of reality. I’ve seen it everywhere. As for myself, I think it is important to recognize the micro-fascisms in people’s behavior without resorting to labeling them as outright fascists. Anyway, that’s a long enough report. I hope you enjoy some of the details from my perspective.
Ted Tyler says
Andino. Thanks for the report. Just what I was looking for.
Arthur says
Great report. Thanks a lot.
Hugo Hackenbush says
Wonderful report. Succinct, fact-based, rational. The antithesis of those who left the lecture.
LeftisruiningCanada says
Thank you for posting, good write up.
Mister Mxyzptlk says
Give a big thinks to Very Fake News for the upload. For some reason Stanford’s equipment failed, luckily an armature media outlet was there to capture the event.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FTB_dOM-VWM
gravenimage says
Mister Mxyzptlk, good to see you posting again.
Mister Mxyzptlk says
Thanks Graven, I still read, and try to donate yearly, but was starting to wonder if I was actually adding anything to the dialogue. There are so many good posters here, it seemed like my adds were just rants :).
gravenimage says
I missed seeing your posts–glad to hear you are still reading here, though.
Ted Tyler says
Thanks, for the video. I could not hear it well from zero to 1 hour 17 minutes – but from 1:17 to 1:32 it was fine.
Mister Mxyzptlk says
Ted,
The guy filming was all set up with some pretty complicated looking portable equipment and was shut down by the university literally right as the presentation began & had to shut down then reset at the talk began, so he was running and gunning.
gravenimage says
Stanford: Fascist students stage walkout at Robert Spencer event, administration bars others wanting to enter
………………….
This is nothing but kabuki theater, and would not have been possible to pull off unless it was coordinated by the university, which is quite shocking–but at this point, I suppose should not surprise, given that the Stanford student administration urged students to inform on anyone putting up posters for the event.
And not letting in anyone outside to the now almost empty hall was just appalling.
Describing them all as “Spencer supporters” is ludicrous, as well–I’m sure many of them were just people who actually wanted to hear what Robert Spencer had to say, and then make up their own minds.
Can’t have that…
Jayell says
What was that placard that the vacant-looking, grinning female with the headgear was holding – ‘An injury to one is an injury to all’? So what’s the latest tally on jihad-related injuries worldwide since the turn of the century and before? Millions by now? Usually perpetrated, aided and abetted by vacant-looking grinning females with the headgear just like that one!
Arthur says
Ah, yes, the reference to Quran 5:32. But where is the placard with Quran 5:33? Q5:33 is the Muslim answer to the Judaic doctrine of ‘an injury to one is an injury to all.’
From: http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2010/05/quran-532-nazam-and-neglecting-context.html
Q 5:32:
On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
Q 5:33
The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.
gravenimage says
And Qur’an 5:32 is chiding the Jews–it is not addressed to Muslims at all.
Demsci says
AH, yes, indeed. This verse was actually quoted and used by president Obama! He used it as an example of how very peaceful/ benign Islam was or could be.
But all the while it was a lie, in that it was not a tenet of Islam. As shown by Islam-experts.
UNCLE VLADDI says
i.e: “We will not tolerate hatred of (righteous anger towards) fellow victims just because they tried to commit some “crimes” against innocent other people! How dare you call helpless fellow victims “criminals!” Whee!”
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Hit them where it hurts: funding.
Contact your local representative, your President. Request that government funding and support be cut until this institution starts behaving like an institution of higher learning and not a hangout for party members.
Luis says
Look this up in your library snowflakes:
Definition of fascism
1 often capitalized :a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Jaem says
You are absolutely right that they are staging walkouts just as the brownshirt Nazis did to people who opposed Nazis. They are too uneducated to know that they are actually participating in the fall of free speech and the repetition of lessons unlearned.
Shame on that University for calling itself a University. It is a socialist kindergarten pandering to the international money funding its development of propaganda.
Lydia says
Thankful that you are okay!
I heard on the background as the news was on here some report about ‘hate groups’ coming to local college campuses and did not hear but it could have been more smear campaign, the timing is noteworthy at least.
Orwellian trolls is all they are.
FYI says
Such petulant,sensitive snowflakes we have these days who are unable to use Reason and Logic.
See how they melt.See how they run.It certainly is a comedy of errors to watch them!
The Groucho-Marxists.
Mr Spencer at Stanford reminds me of Daniel in the Lion’s den(a reference most likely to be lost on the “students” of today).Do you see how the barbarians cannot handle the Truth?
There seems to be a new mindset in these “universities”..
“All religions are equal but islam must be made more equal than others”
“All people are free to practise their creed but muslims are more free than everyone else”
“Criticism of islamic anti-Semitism,anti-Christianity,anti-Gay attitudes is “hate speech”.
Pointing out that islamic scriptures and teachings happily encourage such hatreds is..”islamophobia”
Marbran says
Let’s not forget the history of this event. The Stanford Young Republicans invited Mr. Spencer to speak, and invited any one who cared to join in the listening to do so. The fascist administrators and students, who preach diversity, tolerance and inclusion all day, took it upon themselves to first, try to block Mr. Spencer from speaking outright, then second, organized this walk-out to effectively shut down whatever message Mr. Spencer was to fully bring. This is not simply ignoring his message, but actively preventing him from sharing it at all, and they did so after they were denied their attempt to shut it down ahead of time. That is censorship. That is a violation of the 1st Amendment rights of the Young Republicans at Stanford and of Mr. Spencer. But will anything be done about it? Not likely…