Ray Luc Levasseur is a convicted terrorist and former leader of United Freedom Front, a radical anti-government group responsible for bank robberies, blowing up buildings, injuring people and the murder of state trooper Philip Lamonaco.
Ray Luc Levasseur has been released on parole and has been invited to speak at UMASS Amherst in an effort to understand why citizens take up arms and turn to terrorism. Head of special collections, Robert Cox had the following to say:
And for the trial in Springfield, which cost $10 million and resulted in Levasseur and two others being acquitted on seditious conspiracy, “I think it’s an historical trial and no matter how you look at that ... it is a major historical event in civic history.”
Cox said he believes that the university is one of a the few remaining places where “a very wide spectrum of perspectives can come together. We can have a good civil discussion on the single most difficult issue facing the United States.”
This presents two very real problems and both should be outrageous. First and foremost is the notion that we should allow people connected to terrorism to speak to our children. Youth of today is impressionable enough as it is and inviting anarchists is hardly the kind of information they need to be subjected to. More importantly, why should scumbags like Levasseur be given the opportunity and the forum to speak? This is a slippery slope that enables opportunities for other terrorists to be given similar forums in our nation's schools and colleges. Some argue that under the first amendment, Levasseur is allowed to speak his mind. Unfortunately the first amendment does not extend to those preaching hate and violence. In fact this is the one thing that freedom of speech does NOT enable and hiding under the Constitution int his particular case is laughable. Especially considering that the same people who run Umass Amherst would take any opportunity to slam the 2nd Amendment or allow federal government expansion well past it's constitutional limits. Using our founding document as the law of the land when it suits them best is insulting and woefully transparent.
Secondly, we are dealing with a public institution! This is a school funded by OUR money and it is the duty and responsibility of our highest politicians to prevent this from happening. It is comforting to know that today a resolution passed in Beacon Hill with almost unanimous consent condemning Umass for this invitation. Even one of the most liberal state legislatures can understand how painfully alarming Umass's actions are and in a rare moment of solidarity. Deval Patrick has spoken out against this action, but is seemingly powerless to stop it. Yet one fact remains, we are dealing with a public institution and both the governor and Attorney General can do whatever they wish. A good start can be massive reductions in salaries across the board for all the fat cats making hundreds of thousands a year and a 10% reduction in funding. This may seem harsh, but we need to reign in spending anyway and to balance our budget - apparently we also need to remind Umass who works for whom!
If not for the morality and the justice, then this should at least be stopped for the sake of Donna Lomanaco who has to endure and relive the horrors of losing her husband to a man who should still be in jail!!!
Comments
Levasseur's former activities were outrageous, but so is the current rightwing attempt to censor him. Universities are all about the free exchange of ideas, reprehensible or not. The students are capable of forming their own opinions AND can ask him uncomfortable questions if they so choose. Did you get this bent out of shape when one of those Minutemen self-appointed border patrol guys was invited to speak somewhere?
Alright this is more important than you think. I've studied at UMass, and I'm confident I'll benefit from the university in the future. It was the open and free exchange of ideas at UMass that encouraged me to become as engaged as possible in a healthy public discourse. It's 2009 - and most of the students at UMass are more intelligent than maybe you'd think. Let them assemble, let them exchange ideas. Anyway - anywhere on the UMass campus if you are out in the open, you are on camera being filmed. The Massachusetts State police have got tabs on everyone - if there is any rif-raf in attendance, or if any type of incitement occurs - big brother is on it. You are doing a disservice to our citizenry by trying to protect "our children" from a dissenting opinion. I feel bad for your children - I bet they go on to believe everything The Man has to tell them. Think for yourself. I haven't ever heard of this guy before reading this article; he sounds like a dirtbag - but he is a free American.
OK I would have liked if this website gave me the opportunity to delete that previous comment, but what was said was said.
I do feel strongly however that this man should be allowed to speak and if the audience at UMass is upset - they should be allowed to voice their own opinion. Look at what happened with Andrew Card. (for those of you born before 2000: google "andrew card umass" and click on the first video that comes up) Don't just negate the opportunity for that to happen though.
Mr. Kamenetsky I apologize for attacking you personally - I was outraged by your article when I first read it and responded in a much more obtuse manner than I should have. But it is important that we have an open and free public discourse.
Freedom of speech does not come from the Constitution, but the First Amendment *does* protect unpopular and even hateful and violent speech, especially that directed against the government. No other kind of speech really needs any protection, because who would try to suppress it?
Dave, I can delete your comment if you wish - but I do not find it offensive. As for Kent, I do not distinguish the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
It's not UMass - as an institution, it does not agree; it's some faculty there. And the students aren't children who are going to go home wanting to be terrorists.
Hey, I have an idea. Let's nominate Nidal Malik Hassan to speak to the next West Point graduating class to offer a dissenting opinion. I have no problem with this guy standing on a soap box & making a speech at will, but to get an invite from faculty is an embarrasment to UMass.
Hey, I have an idea. Let's nominate Nidal Malik Hassan to speak to the next West Point graduating class to offer a dissenting opinion. I have no problem with this guy standing on a soap box & making a speech at will, but to get an invite from faculty is an embarrasment to UMass.
Sorry I didn't respond sooner.
Freedom of speech does not come from the Bill of Rights, either. The Bill of Rights prohibits government violation of that right, but it does not "give" us the right.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!