Mediaboss Marketing

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter said Wednesday that her planned speech at the University of California at Berkeley this week was canceled amid mounting concerns about potentially violent protests.

Coulter said in an email that the Young Americas Foundation canceled her appearance scheduled for Thursday, ordering her not to go to the Berkeley campus. The university realized that the group wasnt serious and dropped ongoing negotiations over a room, she wrote. Everyone who should be for free speech has turned tail and run.

The university sent a message to the campus community Wednesday in the midst of uncertainty over whether, or when, Coulter might come to campus. After the university originally canceled her speech for Thursday and instead invited her to speak there next week, Coulter had vowed to speak anyway; with the university not offering a venue, campus Republican groups had been discussing her possibly appearing on a public plaza, where security would have been challenging.

Though no arrangements could be worked out, Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks emphasized that the university has two nonnegotiable commitments, to free speech and to campus safety.

This is a University, not a battlefield, Dirks told the university community. We must make every effort to hold events at a time and location that maximizes the chances that First Amendment rights can be successfully exercised and that community members can be protected. While our commitment to freedom of speech and expression remains absolute, we have an obligation to heed our police departments assessment of how best to hold safe and successful events.

[UC Berkeley readies police after hearing Ann Coulter plans to speak in public plaza]

Even with Coulters appearance now canceled, campus police said many protesters and activists have still vowed to converge on Berkeley, which authorities fear could spark violence.

Capt. Alex Yao, from the universitys campus police, said, Based on intel, we believe protesters are still going to come here. There are those individuals and groups who have said theyre going to come here to commit violence. Yao pointed to numerous public postings online and said his department has also receivedcalls and intelligence gathered from law enforcement partners in the region.

Some groups have said they plan to show up in the morning, Yao said, while others have said they will show up in the afternoon, so police are preparing for possible violence throughout the day. University spokesman Dan Mogulof said the cost of security Thursday will easily figure in the tens of thousand of dollars.

Before Coulters cancellation, the university was girding for potentially violent protests on campus on Thursday, when she was expected to give a speech, potentially on Sproul Plaza, a sprawling open area known for gatherings and demonstrations.

We want to be the new free speech movement on campus, Troy Worden, president of the Berkeley College Republicans, said Wednesday. The longer goal is institutional reform.

But Pranav Jandhyala, the founder of the politically moderate Bridges USA, the other student group that invited Coulter to campus, said Wednesday that their goals had been co-opted by outsiders. People are using our campus community as a battleground, he said. This event wasnt supposed to be about free speech.

He said he got a concussion during the riots over another controversial speaker in February.

[Milos appareance at Berkeley led to riots. He vows to return this fall for a week of free-speech events]

Harmeet Dhillon, the lawyer representing the Berkeley College Republicans and Young Americas Foundation, a national group fighting First Amendment issues on many campuses, said Coulter is entitled to her opinion about what could or should have been done in court, but it was UC-Berkeley that canceled the speech.

On Wednesday, Spencer Brown, a spokesman for the Young Americas Foundation, wrote in an email: We did not capitulate to the Left or abandon Coulter. UC-Berkeley blocked every effort to provide a venue required to sponsor an educational event with Berkeley students.At no time was there ever a space or lecture time confirmed for Ann to speak.

He wrote that the event was intended to be a lecture, not a stroll to Sproul Plaza, and the university had six weeks to lock in a room but did not do so. If we had a hall, or even a room, we would have proceeded.

We didnt run from anything. We stepped up and sued Berkeley and we paid for Ann to give a lecture, not just give a brief speech among violent protesters.

He said the group would move ahead with the lawsuit to protect students and conservative speakers First Amendment rights.Conservatives shouldnt be relegated to speaking outside under the threat of violence when numerous liberal speakers are given venues at any time they wish.

On Wednesday, former Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos said he is planning to hold a week-long series of rallies and events at UC-Berkeley in fall to protest the universitys recent actions.

Berkeley has been at the center of a bitter fight over free speech, pitting protesters from the far-left and the far-right galvanized by President Trumps election in November. Some protesters are demanding that controversial speakers not be given a platform, while others insist that blocking them violates their right to free speech. While confrontations over speakers are nothing new on college campuses, the anger has spun into riots in some places, leaving universities and police trying to balance safety and First Amendment rights.

Over the past two days and even the last hours before Coulter canceled her planned appearance, groups from both ends of the political spectrum appeared to be gearing up for a massive confrontation on campus. Anarchists and antifascists planned protests.

So didother groups:We have amassed an army and are ready to protect her, said Gavin McInnes, founder of a conservative group called Proud Boys, which he has described as a pro-Western fraternity for men who refuse to apologize for creating the modern world.

Oath Keepers, a national militia group made up of former military and law enforcement officers, posted a call-out for members to converge on Berkeley for a new mission to protect Coulter and her speech.

We now have a green light on this operation and we call on you to step up with us and help us once again defend free speech, wrote the founder Steward Rhodes in a Facebook post on Wednesday. The group had turned up at a rally that grew violent earlier this month at a public park in Berkeley, as the conservatives brawled with anarchists and antifascists trying to shut the event down.

Rhodess message to Oath Keepers members provided maps, logistics, and orders to bring as much gear as possible in anticipation of violence: helmets, mask and goggles in case of tear gas, fire-resistant gloves, body armor and steel-toe boots if possible.

Kyle Chapman a San Francisco Bay-area man who became a hero to many conservatives after a video went viral of him at a Berkeley rally breaking a wooden sign post over the head of a protester also announced in recent days that he was forming a group called Alt-Knights to defend our right wing brethren when police and government fail to do so. This organization is for those that possess the Warrior Spirit. The weak or timid need not apply.

Three times this year, protesters wearing masks have turned demonstrations about speech into dangerous mob confrontations at Berkeley, with injuries, fires and massive property damage.

[How Berkeley has become the far left and far rights battleground]

In February, swarms of Black Bloc protesters bent on disruption swept into the crowd of students demonstrating against Yiannopoulos, then a writer for Breitbart, and within minutes broke windows and set fire to a propane tank. University officials, acting on police advice, canceled his speech because they did not feel they could ensure his or the communitys safety.

At Berkeley, the site of countless protests and the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement of the 1960s, the level of extremism was unprecedented. But canceling Yiannopouloss speech angered many who believe conservative opinions are being smothered at the nations college campuses.

In a tweet, Trump raised the threat of pulling federal funding from the university.

[Trump lashes back at Berkeley after violent protests over Milo speech]

Following the initial Coulter speech cancellation, student groups on Monday filed a lawsuit against university officials, contending that the school was stifling free speech, particularly for conservative students whose views are rejected by many on the liberal campus.

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter says threats of violence won't stop her from speaking at the University of California at Berkeley on April 27. (Reuters)

[Lawsuit filed against UC-Berkeley for canceling Ann Coulter speech]

It is deeply depressing and contrary to our nations best traditions to see violence used to silence speech with which some, or even many, may disagree, said Will Creeley, senior vice president for legal and public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. He said he worries that there is more of the same to come, with campuses serving as a sort of stage for these debates.

People feel increasingly not only polarized, but also desperate. Theres a dangerous romanticization of violence that theres a moral imperative to take physical action to prevent speakers on campus that some find disagreeable. Theres a sense that these speakers are not only voicing unpopular opinions but also doing some kind of physical or psychic harm to students on campus. Theres a conflation of spoken words and physical violence that I think is very dangerous and is being used, in some quarters, to justify this kind of reaction weve seen.

Dirks, Berkeleys chancellor, said Tuesday that because of the visibility of the clashes in recent months, and because of Berkeleys iconic status he said everyone loves to be able to talk about how were the center of the un-free speech movement university officials are concerned that they have become an unwilling symbol.

We feel like speakers are targeting us, precisely to provoke violent confrontations with a political purpose in mind, Dirks said.

Jandhyala, the student who founded Bridges USA to fight polarization and spark dialogue between politically opposing groups, said thats why his group invited Coulter.

Instead the whole affair has only polarized everyone involved further.

The Berkeley College Republicans, who were organizing the event alongside his, are no longer talking to him, he said. The threat of violence and protests looms over the campus as far-right and far-left groups are talking about showing up Thursday.

Im disappointed in the College Republicans, in the university, and Ann Coulter, who at some point in the middle of this just started trying to capitalize on the situation.

Jandhyala said as late as Wednesday morning just before Coulter canceled her appearance, his group was still working on securing an off-campus venue and had identified several possibilities where her talk would have been live-streamed and where she could talk with a smaller crowd of students. But Jandhyala said Coulters team and the Berkeley College Republicans never responded to their proposal.

It started to become more about provocation than being committed to this idea of free dialogue, he said. We were worried about the fact that she was going to come to speak and turn this campus more into a battleground than anything.

Here is Dirks message to campus in full:

To the Members of the Berkeley Campus Community,

As I write this, I am aware of the uncertainty surrounding Ann Coulters stated intention to come to campustomorrowafternoon. We will be sending out a separate message later today with updated information about safety arrangements, as well as our hopes and expectations regarding how members of our campus community should conduct themselves. For now, I want to share my thoughts about all that has led up to the current situation in which we find ourselves.

This University has two nonnegotiable commitments, one to Free Speech, the other to the safety of our campus community members, their guests, and the public. In that context, we cannot ignore or deny what is a new reality. Groups and individuals from the extreme ends of the political spectrum have made clear their readiness and intention to utilize violent tactics in support or in protest of certain speakers at UC Berkeley. In early February, a speakers presence on campus ignited violent conflict and significant damage to campus property. In March, political violence erupted on the streets of Berkeley. In April opposing groups again violently clashed on the edge of our campus. While some seem inclined to use these events and circumstances to draw attention to themselves, we remain focused on the needs, rights, and interests of our students and our community. We cannot wish away or pretend that these threats do not exist.

The strategies necessary to address these evolving threats are also evolving, but the simplistic view of some that our police department can simply step in and stop violent confrontations whenever they occur ignores reality. Protecting public safety in these circumstances requires a multifaceted approach. This approach must take into account the use of time, place, and manner guidelines, devised according to the specific threats presented. Because threats or strategic concerns may differ, so must our approach. In all cases, however, we only seek to ensure the successful staging of free speech rights; we make no effort to control or restrict the content of expression, regardless of differing political views.

This is a University, not a battlefield. We must make every effort to hold events at a time and location that maximizes the chances that First Amendment rights can be successfully exercised and that community members can be protected. While our commitment to freedom of speech and expression remains absolute, we have an obligation to heed our police departments assessment of how best to hold safe and successful events.

In relation to the invitation made by a student group for Ann Coulter to speak at Berkeley this week, we have therefore to take seriously the intelligence UCPD has regarding threats of violence that could endanger our students, our community, and perhaps even Ms Coulter herself. It is specific, significant, and real. Yet, despite those threats we have, and will remain ready, to welcome her to campus, and assume the risks, challenges, and expenses that will attend her visit. That is demanded by our commitment to Free Speech. What we will not do is allow our students, other members of the campus community, and the public to be needlessly endangered by permitting an event to be held in a venue that our police force does not believe to be protectable. If UCPD believes there is a significant security threat attendant to a particular event, we cannot allow it to be held in a venue with a limited number of exits; in a hall that cannot be cordoned off; in an auditorium with floor to ceiling glass; in any space that does not meet basic safety criteria established by UCPD. This is the sole reason we could not accommodate Ms. Coulter on April 27th, and the very reason we offered her alternative dates in early May and September, when venues that satisfy safety requirements are available.

Contrary to some press reports and circulating narratives, the UC Berkeley administration did not cancel the Coulter event and has never prohibited Ms. Coulter from coming on campus. Instead, we received a request to provide a venue on one single day, chosen unilaterally by a student group without any prior consultation with campus administration or law enforcement. After substantial evaluation and planning by our law enforcement professionals, we were forced to inform the group that, in light of specific and serious security threats that UCPDs intelligence had identified, there was no campus venue available at a time on that date where the event could be held safely and without disruption. We offered an alternative date for the event (which was rejected) and offered to work with the group to find dates in the future when the event could occur. Throughout this process our effort has been to support our students desire to hold their event safely and successfully.

Sadly and unfortunately, concern for student safety seems to be in short supply in certain quarters. We believe that once law enforcement professionals determine there are security risks attendant to a particular event, speakers need to focus on what they actually want to achieve. If it is to speak to a large audience, to make a case for their positions, to engage students in discourse, we stand ready to make that work on any date when a protectable venue is available. If, on the other hand, the objective is stir up conflict and violence without regard for the safety, rights, and interests of others in order to advance personal interests we cannot abandon our commitment to the safety of our community members.

We will work cooperatively with members of our campus community who would sponsor events to ensure that those events can occur and that the campus can actually benefit from the dialogue their invited speakers might generate. To this end, we are working to clarify our policies and practices so that all know what is expected and how sponsors can best engage us to facilitate the success of their planned events. We trust that cooperation and good will among the members of our own community can help us jointly defend our campus against the threats to both speech and safety currently being posed by outside groups.

Sincerely,

Nicholas Dirks

Chancellor

UC Berkeley

Dwoskin reported from Berkeley. Staff writer Perry Stein contributed to this report.

See the article here:
Ann Coulter speech at UC Berkeley canceled, again, amid fears ...

By Pranav Jandhyala By Pranav Jandhyala April 27 Pranav Jandhyala is a freshman at the University of California at Berkeley, where he is the founder and co-president of BridgeUSA at Berkeley.

University of California at Berkeley freshman Pranav Jandhyala is the founder and co-president of BridgeUSA, the nonpartisan organization that invited conservative commentator Ann Coulter to campus. (Victoria Walker/The Washington Post)

I am the founder of BridgeUSA at Berkeley, the nonpartisan organization that worked with College Republicans to invite Ann Coulter to the University of California at Berkeleys campus. Our organization hopes to create a future in which our campus and our country are venues for free and fair political discussion and debate from all sides. We stand for the preservation of spaces where political ideas can be shared and challenged without fear of violence.

To that end, we decided to help bring Coulter to Berkeley today to speak to a body of mainly liberal students on immigration. Unfortunately, threatened attacks from extremist groups forced the cancellation of this event. Lets be clear: Blame for the cancellation of Coulters speech does not rest solely on the shoulders of any individual. The administration, student groups including ours, external resistance groups and the media all made mistakes that need to be corrected. Fundamentally, though, the system of political dialogue and debate is broken, not just on this campus, but across the nation.

We formed our organization earlier this year after the infamous Milo Yiannopoulos event here, where an incendiary speaker, violent rioters and a divided nation combined to create the perfect storm of political controversy. The university canceled a speech in February by Yiannopoulos, a prominent conservative writer, after intense protests that led to a campuswide shelter in place order. That day, instigation and violence replaced mediation and conversation and we wanted to repair this breakdown in communication. Our goal since then has been to facilitate dialogue between political opposites, allowing everyone to engage with and understand opposing viewpoints. We have so far been successful in hosting forum sessions and debates on a series of different issues. Weve hosted five events in about two months. Many students were immediately interested in our mission, and our membership has expanded rapidly we have 40 officers and about 150 to 200 members.

Coulter was the choice of conservative groups on campus to represent their perspective in a larger campus debate about illegal immigration we were hosting. Liberal groups on campus had chosen Maria Echaveste, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton. She spoke on April 17 and answered questions from conservative students in the audience.

Coulters ideas have an audience, and though most members of our group dont agree with her, we recognize the following she draws. We also understand that many see her as an inflammatory figure with destructive beliefs that disqualify her from appearing at an institution of higher learning. But we believe the only productive way to fight views one sees as bad or dangerous is with better views. So we chose to get involved and include Coulter in our speaker series on immigration so students could hear, and actively challenge, her views. We planned for the event to be a debate-style Q&A with rebuttals to allow for a back-and-forth dialogue. Coulter would have fielded tough questions about her views from students in the audience, and we would have done our part to ensure that she would answer those questions in their entirety and give students the opportunity to respond. Rather than repeating the failures of Yiannopouloss event, we wanted to create a national example for what free discourse and the questioning of ideas should look like here at Berkeley, the home of the free speech movement 50 years ago.

Free speech isnt about provocation, violence, publicity stunts, selling books or testing limits. At their best, universities start and nurture conversations that advance dialogue and understanding further. Regrettably, the developments surrounding this event led it to fall out of line with our beliefs as an organization.

[Why free speech on campus is not as simple as everyone thinks]

National media coverage of Coulters visit mostly overlooked BridgeUSA at Berkeleys role and our plan for the event, instead reporting that the incident was a repeat of the Yiannopoulos fracas exactly what we set out to avoid. And as the tensions between student safety and free speech entered the justice system, Yiannopoulos himself announced that he would be organizing a free speech week on Sproul Plaza where he and his supporters would attack a new perceived enemy of free speech every day. It pains me to see our campus being used as a pulpit for bad actors, people whose goal is to elevate themselves by inciting violence, without a thought for the safety of students who live and attend school here.

Sproul Plaza is becoming a battleground, and the ones who are left to pick up the bill of consequences is the Berkeley student body, which is vilified every day in the press for destruction that outside groups are responsible for. Antifa and other black-bloc groups that are able to organize do so far beyond the perimeters of our campus, and they receive an insignificant amount of support from Berkeley students, if any. But in national news, all thats seen is violence and destruction being used to censor speech.

Whats disheartening to me is seeing the words free speech being used as a tool to garner headlines and publicity. The whole purpose behind the idea of free speech has been lost. Whats happening on our campus is no longer about advancing discourse anymore. Its no longer an attempt to reach a larger truth and understanding about policy issues so that better decisions can be made. Its just a furious chase to get in front of the news cameras and be trending on Twitter and Facebook.

Conservative groups, in their attempt to frame this complex series of events as a free speech battle by suing Berkeleys administration, have used the label of free speech as a tool for publicity. Our organization prides itself on the values of free inquiry and discourse, yet we understand the impossible trade-off that the university faces: the administration is caught between upholding its commitment to free speech and its responsibility for student safety.

[The right has its own version of political correctness. Its just as stifling.]

The administration attempted to work with us, to propose alternative dates this semester and next semester where a defensible venue would be available. In balancing the concerns of protecting students and allowing peaceful protest, they never backed down from their commitment to help us bring Coulter to campus. It is easy and expedient to blame the university in this situation, but that avoids the actual problem. The true issue here is not the way that the university handled this situation; rather, it is the fact that this trade-off between student safety and free speech even exists in the first place.

Its a scary situation when the university cannot perfectly perform its duty, when it cannot guarantee the safety of all speakers at all times in all places. Those who would threaten student safety and destroy our campus to silence speech they disagree with are culpable for the existence of this new trade-off. And violence and threats which restrict the free exchange of ideas constitute fascism under the banner of anti-fascism.

We challenge the Berkeley administration, the Berkeley College Republicans and Coulter to work collaboratively and address the cancellation of the event and the current political climate. These respective parties continue to affirm their commitment to free speech, but they have demonstrated minimal effort in speaking freely with one another. Civil discussions are necessary to progress our democracy and address pressing points of contention.

We can alleviate polarization if we come to the table to talk, but until then, there is no constructive way forward. Threatening violence does not change minds, and instigating controversy for publicity does not fix a broken system. We, as a community, have to recognize that there is a world outside of Berkeley: How can we promote what we believe if we are associated with images of violence? We need to act with the knowledge that everyone is watching.

We refuse to meet speech with violence and oppression. We refuse to invoke the right to free speech to inflame, attack and generate publicity. We refuse to accept the current status quo surrounding speech on university campuses across the country. Instead, we will continue to pursue our mission of creating environments in which students can engage with their peers as free thinkers, express their opinions without fear and have their beliefs, suppositions and prejudices challenged rather than dismissed. Only through these means can we begin to bridge the gap brought on by polarization and allow for a free exchange of political ideas.

Written with additional contributions bySean Vernon, editor of BridgeUSA at Berkeleys publication

Read more:

To fight hate speech, stop talking about it

What its like to be a college professor who supports Donald Trump

No, protesters who point out campus racism arent silencing anyone

Read the original post:
I invited Ann Coulter to speak at UC Berkeley. Heres why ...

The controversy over conservative commentator Ann Coulters planned appearance this week at UC Berkeley took another turn Wednesday when she and her sponsors pulled out even as campus police readied anyway for riot-like demonstrations.

Im so sorry for free speech [being] crushed by thugs, Coulter posted on Twitter in announcing that she had abandoned efforts to find a campus venue where she could speak Thursday.

Its sickening when a radical thuggish institution like Berkeley can so easily snuff out the cherished American right to free speech, she added.

Berkeley administrators and police countered that their first concern was safety in the face of increasingly violent demonstrations at the famously liberal university.

Coulter had been invited by two student groups to speak on immigration policy as a counterpoint to a Clinton administration advisor. The address became a campus-freedoms rallying point for conservative groups when administrators first canceled Coulters visit, then rescheduled it to an unpopular date.

But even without a high-profile headliner such as Coulter, UC Berkeley Police Capt. Alex Yao said, authorities expect extremists to arrive on campus to have violence against each other. He said students should expect a heavy police presence Thursday and a very, very low tolerance of violence.

Among those contemplating their own Berkeley events on Thursday were Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes and Canadian alt-right blogger Lauren Southern, according to statements Southern made.

Administrators cited unspecified threats of violence in limiting Coulter to a daytime engagement off the main campus. The Berkeley campus and adjacent downtown has been the scene of three violent clashes since February between alt-right demonstrators and white nationalists on one side and anti-fascist and anarchist groups on the other.

Coulter had pledged to show up anyway, even contemplating an outdoor address. But she discarded that idea Wednesday in the face of continued threats, the universitys refusal to find her a building and the withdrawal of her sponsors.

The president of one student group, BridgeCal, said the escalating rhetoric surrounding what was intended as discourse contributed to the groups decision to rescind its invitation.

Ann herself is using this a little to her advantage to engage in the test of free speech, said Pranav Jandhyala. He said he found Coulters recent public comments unnecessarily provocative.

We cant endorse an event like that, Jandhyala said.

The other student host, Berkeley College Republicans, also withdrew its invitation but said the issue always had been about free speech.

The group and Coulters well-funded financial sponsor, the Virginia-based Young Americas Foundation, filed a federal free speech lawsuit Monday accusing the university of using security concerns as a guise to censor conservative viewpoints. College Republicans President Troy Worden said he would pursue the litigation.

The fact that we couldnt even get a speaker on campus, thats our primary concern, he said.

The College Republicans in February sought to host right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, but the event was canceled when hundreds of demonstrators swarmed the venue including some in masks who tore down barricades and smashed windows.

The group also invited controversial writer David Horowitz to speak this month but withdrew the request, citing poor attendance expected at the time and location the university required.

The American Civil Liberties Union raised its own concerns Wednesday. National Legal Director David Cole said he was troubled by how threats of violence effectively silenced Coulter.

If the government gets to decide which speech counts as hate speech, the powers that be may later feel free to censor any speech they dont like, Cole said in a statement. For the future of our democracy, we must protect bigoted speech from government censorship.

On college campuses, that means that the best way to combat hateful speech is through counter-speech, vigorous and creative protest, and debate, not threats of violence or censorship.

UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks released a public statement that stressed the universitys commitment to free speech and attributed the risk of mayhem and free speech challenges to outside groups.

This is a university, not a battlefield, Dirks said. The strategies necessary to address these evolving threats are also evolving, but the simplistic view of some that our police department can simply step in and stop violent confrontations whenever they occur ignores reality.

Berkeley police have arrested 21 individuals and have warrants for an additional 11 suspected of being involved in the violent demonstrations in March and April, a spokesman said.

City Police Chief Andrew Greenwood said officers are dealing with combatants eager to fight, and any use of force might escalate the violence.

We are rightly expected to not get swept into the volatility of the crowd, he wrote in a report to the Berkeley City Council.

Coulter is still traveling to the Bay Area. She is scheduled to appear Friday at a sold-out fundraiser for the Republican Party of Stanislaus County.

Organizer Janice Keating said the party chose Coulter because of her ability to draw a crowd. Demonstrations were not expected, Keating said, but were prepared as best we can be.

The organization has hired private security to bolster the efforts of the Modesto Police Department.

Los Angeles Times staff writer Teresa Watanabe contributed to this report.

paige.stjohn@latimes.com

Twitter: @paigestjohn

ALSO:

Ann Coulter, free speech and UC Berkeley: How a talk became a political bombshell

Opinion: Berkeley has become the place where political extremists come to throw punches

Editorial: Let Ann Coulter speak

UPDATES:

7:35 p.m.: This article was updated with Coulters decision to cancel her appearance and a comment from the ACLU.

11:35 a.m.: This article was updated with details about another student group withdrawing its invitation to commentator Ann Coulter and comments from Janice Keating of the Republican Party of Stanislaus County.

10:45 a.m.: This article was updated with comments from Pranav Jandhyala, president of the student group BridgeCal.

10 a.m.: This article was updated with comments from UC Berkeley spokesman Dan Mogulof and UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks.

This article was originally published at 9:30 a.m.

Read more:
Ann Coulter says she will not speak at Berkeley: 'Its a sad ...

Rich Lowry, Syndicated columnist 5:35 p.m. CT April 30, 2017

Rich Lowry(Photo: Special to The Clarion-Ledger)

Because the California National Guard couldnt be mobilized in time, Ann Coulter had to withdraw from giving a speech at Berkeley.

If you take it seriously, thats the import of UC Berkeleys decision to do everything it could to keep the conservative provocateur from speaking on campus over safety concerns.

If somebody brings weapons, theres no way to block off the site, or to screen them, the chancellor of the university said of Coulters plan to go ahead and speak at an open-air forum after the school canceled a scheduled talk.

The administrator made it sound as if Coulter would have been about as safe at Berkeley as she would have been addressing a meeting of MS-13 and he might have been right.

We have entered a new, much less metaphorical phase of the campus-speech wars. Were beyond hissing, or disinviting. Were no longer talking about the hecklers veto, but the masked-thugs-who-will-burn-trash-cans-and-assault-you-and-your-entourage veto.

Coulter is a rhetorical bomb thrower, which is an entirely different thing than being a real bomb thrower. Coulter has never tried to shout down a speaker she doesnt like. She hasnt thrown rocks at cops. She isnt an arsonist. She offers up provocations that she gamely defends in almost any setting with arguments that people are free to accept, or reject, or attempt to correct.

In other words, in the Berkeley context, shes the liberal. She believes in the efficacy of reason and in the free exchanges of ideas. Her enemies do not.

Indeed, the budding fascism that progressives feared in the Trump years is upon us, although not in the form they expected. It is represented by the black-clad shock troops of the anti-fa movement who are violent, intolerant and easily could be mistaken for the street fighters of the extreme right in 1930s Europe. That they call themselves anti-fascist speaks to a colossal lack of self-awareness.

It is incumbent on all responsible progressives to reject this movement, and just as important the broader effort to suppress controversial speech. This is why former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Deans comments about hate speech not being protected by the First Amendment were so alarming. In Deans defense, he had no idea what he was talking about, but he was effectively making himself the respectable voice of the rock throwers.

Deans view was that Berkeley is within its rights to make the decision that it puts their campus in danger if they have her there. This justification, advanced by the school itself, is profoundly wrongheaded.

It is an inherently discriminatory standard, since the Berkeley College Republicans arent given to smashing windows and throwing things when an extreme lefty shows up on campus, which is a near-daily occurrence.

It would deny Coulter something she has a right to do (speak her mind on the campus of a public university) in reaction to agitators doing things they dont have a right to do (destroy property, among other acts of mayhem).

It would suppress an intellectual threat, i.e., a dissenting viewpoint, and reward a physical threat. This is perverse.

For now there is a consensus in favor of free speech in the country that is especially entrenched in the judiciary. The anti-fa and other agitators arent going to change that anytime soon. But they could effectively make it too burdensome for certain speakers to show up on campus, and over time more Democrats like Dean could rationalize this fact by arguing that so-called hate speech doesnt deserve First Amendment protection.

So, it isnt enough for schools like UC Berkeley to say that they value free speech, yet do nothing to punish disrupters and throw up their hands at the task of providing security for controversial speakers. If everyone else gets safe space at UC Berkeley, Coulter deserves one. If the anti-fa are willing to attack free speech through illegal force, the authorities should be willing to defend it by lawful force.

Heck, if necessary, call out the National Guard.

Email Rich Lowry at comments.lowry@)nationalreview.com.

Read or Share this story: http://on.thec-l.com/2qmysaB

Continue reading here:
In Berkeley context, Ann Coulter is the liberal - Jackson Clarion Ledger

New York Post

Berkeley students sue university for canceling Ann Coulter's visit New York Post BERKELEY, Calif. Ann Coulter is now at the center of a civil rights lawsuit filed Monday against the University of California, Berkeley, by students who say the school is violating their right to free speech by canceling the conservative pundit's ... and more »

Read this article:
Berkeley students sue university for canceling Ann Coulter's visit - New York Post