As college student, Eric Holder participated in ‘armed’ takeover of former Columbia University R

Why wasn't this discussed during the vetting process for Eric Holder when he was appointed as Attorney General? Oh, wait he was not vetted. The first proof of a lack of vetting came when it was revealed that in 1995 Holder suggested the government brainwash people concerning guns... Then we have fast and furious...

Now, we have this revelation concerning Holder's activities while attending Columbia University... The man should not be in the position that he is in today....

As a freshman at Columbia University in 1970, future Attorney General Eric Holder participated in a five-day occupation of an abandoned Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) headquarters with a group of black students later described by the university’s Black Students’ Organization as “armed,” The Daily Caller has learned.

Department of Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler has not responded to questions from The Daily Caller about whether Holder himself was armed — and if so, with what sort of weapon.

Holder was then among the leaders of the Student Afro-American Society (SAAS), which demanded that the former ROTC office be renamed the “Malcolm X Lounge.” The change, the group insisted, was to be made “in honor of a man who recognized the importance of territory as a basis for nationhood.”

Black radicals from the same group also occupied the office of Dean of Freshman Henry Coleman until their demands were met. Holder has publicly acknowledged being a part of that action.

In his own words...

“I was among a large group of students who felt strongly about the way we thought the world should be, and we weren’t afraid to make our opinions heard,” he said during Columbia’s 2009 commencement exercises. “I did not take a final exam until my junior year at Columbia — we were on strike every time finals seemed to roll around — but we ran out of issues by that third year.”

So, for two years Holder never took a final exam at Columbia!!! How in the the hell did he graduate?? Perhaps the University "passed" him because he was part of this very vocal and belligerent group?? Squeaky wheel gets the diploma...

No Prosecutions for this "occupation" of the ROTC facility. Possibly out of fear of reprisals...

Though then-Dean Carl Hovde declared the occupation of the Naval ROTC office illegal and said it violated university policy, the college declined to prosecute any of the students involved. This decision may have been made to avoid a repeat of violent Columbia campus confrontations between police and members of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) in 1968.

Holder's ties to the Black Panthers... Probably explains why he dismissed all charges of voter intimidation against the New Black Panthers... Holder was also involved in Self Segregation

Emboldened by their successes, SAAS leaders continued to press their demands, eventually working with local black radicals who were not college students. A young Eric Holder joined the fray in 1969 as a college freshman.

The SAAS also actively supported the Black Panthers and the Black Power movement, according to Stefan Bradley, professor of African-American studies at Saint Louis University and author of the 2009 book “Harlem vs. Columbia University.” He has described the Columbia organization as being separatist in nature.

“In 1969, SAAS has taken up a new campaign to establish a Black Institute on campus that would house a black studies program, an all-black admissions board, all-black faculty members, administrators and staff and they wanted the university to pay for it,” Bradley told an audience in 2009.

dailycaller.com...

Enough is enough.. Holder MUST go and can takes his boss with him. They are both clearly cut from the same cloth ideologically. Bye Bye!!

Enough is enough.. Holder MUST go and can takes his boss with him. They are both clearly cut from the same cloth ideologically. Bye Bye!

I concur !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I also agree that people have been brainwashed when it comes to all thins gun related, and anyone who thinks guns should only be in the arms of the police, and the government.is:

An enemy to the state, and the constitution.

Are you telling me that he participated in protests while he was in college??? Shocking!!!

Romney assaulted a gay student and cut off his hair, and no big deal, just kids being kids. But Holder involved in a protest where they "occupied" an empty building, and you want to hang him.

Too funny.

reply to post by neo96


Funny thing with this latest Holder info is that he has quite a bit in common with Barack and Michelle... each of whom were involved in racially driven occupations and protests while at Harvard. The racial divide is the only thing that flourishes in their core and it has been the only issue that has driven them throughout their entire adult lives. Sadly, they have taken that all the way to the White House so they can inflict it all on the nation....

Trouble lurks on our brief horizon...

Originally posted by HostileApostle
Are you telling me that he participated in protests while he was in college??? Shocking!!!

Romney assaulted a gay student and cut off his hair, and no big deal, just kids being kids. But Holder involved in a protest where they "occupied" an empty building, and you want to hang him.

Too funny.

That story was never proven nor was it proven that he was openly gay at the time and the alleged victim is now dead and never shared that alleged story with anyone his family... Holder was involved in an armed takeover of University property... Big difference when you take by force vs. staging a sit in or protest...

reply to post by jibeho


Birds of a feather always flock together, those who keep perpetuating that racial divide offers no solutions.

Trouble is brewing and race relations have been set back 50 years the future does not look to bright.

reply to post by jibeho

That story was never proven nor was it proven that he was openly gay at the time and the alleged victim is now dead and never shared that alleged story with anyone his family... Holder was involved in an armed takeover of University property... Big difference when you take by force vs. staging a sit in or protest...

Yes, dismiss it because it makes Romney look like a very bad person. Even though the person who was assaulted admitted it, Romney's "best friend" admitted it, and others admitted it. It is only Romney who can't seem to remember anything about it. But you go ahead and keep lying to yourself.

Please tell me how you take an abandoned building by force? It's as easy as walking into the door, how forceful.


Desperation causes strange things, but this has got to be up in the top 10.

reply to post by HostileApostle


Gimme a link... The alleged victim is deceased and never admitted anything... ask his sister....

Nice derail!! Get back on the topic of Eric Holder's involvement of an armed takeover of University property and a University that was too scared to prosecute them.

BTW is was allegedly when Romney was in high school not College....

reply to post by jibeho


It's in the original article about it.

www.washingtonpost.com... ?tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost

It's funny how you are trying to deny this happened.

All of Romney's "friends" agree that it happened, that it was led by Romney, and that he did it because of the way the kid "looked".

Deny it all you want, it's entertaining.

reply to post by HostileApostle


Start a thread on it then open your mouth to eat crow. The Post hit piece is full of BS, lies and fraud

The Post based this hit on testimony from five men who “mostly lean Democratic,” including one who was a volunteer for the 2008 Obama campaign. No one else seems able remember the incident taking place.

Including, as it turns out, both a friend of Romney’s that the Post openly and fraudulently asserted had “long been bothered” by the haircut hazing… and the “victim’s” own family.

Romney friend Stu White dropped the first bombshell on the Washington Post’s phony story, telling ABC News “he was not present for the prank, in which Romney is said to have forcefully cut a student’s long hair, and was not aware of it until this year when he was contacted by the Washington Post.” The assertion that he was “long bothered” by Romney’s alleged display of full-contact barbering was entirely false, and there is no way to claim it was not a deliberately false impression inserted into the Post story, since they knew perfectly well that they are the ones who told White about it, just a few weeks ago.

Much worse for the Post was a statement released by John Lauber’s sister Betsy, which reads, in full: “The family of John Lauber is releasing a statement saying the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda. There will be no more comments from the family.”

Wow. Just… wow. The Post apparently didn’t bother clearing their smear job with the victim’s family, even though they interviewed both Christine and Betsy Lauber for the piece. They thought they were contributing to a respectful tribute, not an ugly partisan hit.

Christine Lauber told ABC News that her brother never mentioned the allegedly life-destroying traumatic incident related by the Washington Post, and “probably wouldn’t have said anything” even if something like it did happen, because he presumably was not the fragile character he has been portrayed as. Furthermore, she tearfully insisted that “if he were still alive today, he would be furious” over the Post story.

But wait! This gets worse. Someone at the Post apparently panicked after Stu White spilled the beans to ABC News, because they committed one of the greatest sins in journalism: they quietly edited the Romney hit piece without publishing a retraction, as Breitbart.com requested in writing. The false statement about Stu White has been changed to read as follows:

“I always enjoyed his pranks,” said Stu White, a popular friend of Romney’s who went on to a career as a public school teacher and said he has been “disturbed” by the Lauber incident since hearing about it several weeks ago, before being contacted by The Washington Post. “But I was not the brunt of any of his pranks.”

This was a colossally stupid move on the Post’s part. How often do people have to be reminded that the Internet never forgets? That caches and screen grabs of dishonestly edited material rest comfortably in the hands of media watchdogs?

ABC mentions that some other, as yet nameless, classmates of Romney are eager to dish dirt on his teenage misbehavior, although no one seems ready to corroborate the Lauber hair hazing incident. That effort will misfire badly, and solidify support for Romney from a public sick unto death of attempts to distract from Barack Obama’s record in office.

www.humanevents.com...

Not surprised that the truth never made it to your brain.... Any thoughts on Holder???

@ HostileApostle, When did this thread become a thread about Romney? You want to derail this Thread, Start Your Own!
This thread was started about one of Obama's Thugs, E. Holder and the Radical Student Organization Holder Belonged to in College.
This Organization as a Face Book Page and Members it would appear, www.facebook.com...
Looks like you need an Resume to be apart of their Organization, www.facebook.com...

It would also appear that E. Holder can no more tell the Truth Than his Master Obama.

Holder told Columbia University’s graduating law students during a 2010 commencement speech that the 1970 incident happened “during my senior year,” but Holder was a freshman at the time.

Holder also claimed in his 2009 speech that he and his fellow students decided to “peacefully occupy one of the campus offices.” In contrast, the BSO’s website recounted its predecessor organization’s activities by noting that that “in 1970, a group of armed black students [the SAAS] seized the abandoned ROTC office.”

Just how Peaceful of an Organization do you think the SAAS was or is? They supported some other really radical groups.

The SAAS also actively supported the Black Panthers and the Black Power movement, according to Stefan Bradley, professor of African-American studies at Saint Louis University and author of the 2009 book “Harlem vs. Columbia University.” He has described the Columbia organization as being separatist in nature.

In March 1970 the SAAS released a statement supporting twenty-one Black Panthers charged with plotting to blow up department stores, railroad tracks, a police station and the New York Botanical Gardens.

dailycaller.com...
righttruth.typepad.com...
Holder and his College Buddies,,,,,

reply to post by neo96


And the chickens have come home to roost.

Let me get this right. In the 1970s, a college student participated in a social political action??? And someone MIGHT even have been "armed"??? WHAT??? Its unheard of!!

Oh, you say it's NOT unheard of? Thousands of college students participated in social political action?

Oh, OK.

(Why is the word "armed" in quotes, I wonder... Why is there no further mention of what "arms" they were supposedly wielding?)

What do these black people think they're doing protesting something they think is wrong? What kind of uppity people are they, anyway?

Yeah, we see thousands of cases of people protesting, especially in the 60s and 70s, but ... The Bill of Rights says people can protest and "force" their positions by use of peaceful protest... But these guys? They're dangerous!

Fire him and his colored boss! Both of them are nothing but thugs!

Originally posted by neo96

Enough is enough.. Holder MUST go and can takes his boss with him. They are both clearly cut from the same cloth ideologically. Bye Bye!

I concur !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I also agree that people have been brainwashed when it comes to all thins gun related, and anyone who thinks guns should only be in the arms of the police, and the government.is:

An enemy to the state, and the constitution.

Woah! Hang on there just a moment mister!

Maybe I didn't read it right, but there is NO MENTION of any guns at all, and you immediately jump to the assumption that this guy was a terrorist?

Sounds to me as though it was a peaceful protest, and occupation (something that happened a hell of a lot back when people actually gave a damn about the way their nation was being run and the wars they were involved in). And yet you immediately jump to the conclusion that "armed" means "gun".

Lets also not forget that people fighting against a protest will make up plenty of BS to paint the protesters as a violent group of anarchists.

reply to post by jibeho


You have forgotten one of the rules for Liberals and Progressives.
It is ALWAYS different for Liberals. ALWAYS.

It is different, and ok because, well, Holder did it for a good cause
Or, he was just young and exploring this or that.


Holder, you should be booted from position, and tarred and feathered. And take your looser President with you as well.

Originally posted by jibeho
Why wasn't this discussed during the vetting process for Eric Holder when he was appointed as Attorney General?

Because he wasn't properly vetted. He was appointed by Obama who was riding the messiah-wave at the time. Obama .. who himself was deeply involved with a racist organization in Chicago for 20 years. He gave Holder a free pass on his Malcolm X armed campus takeover. And the followers turn a blind eye .. because it's Obamas buddy.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Gawd that reminded me of Ceci 2006. Loaded language deflection. Bottom line -
Protesting? okay. Armed protests like this? Not okay. Skin color ... irrelevant on that matter.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Gawd that reminded me of Ceci 2006.

That's fine. I actually have come to understand her MUCH better because of some learning experiences in my life.

Protesting? okay. Armed protests like this? Not okay.

Who was armed and what were they armed with? Note the word "armed" is in quotes... They could have been 'armed' with a toothbrush for all we know.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Who was armed and what were they armed with?

Don't know. Could have been your 'toothbrush' .. could have been knives .. could have been guns. We will never know because he is so high up and everything at that level gets covered up. Be it a (D) or an (R) .. it all gets covered.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Who was armed and what were they armed with? Note the word "armed" is in quotes... They could have been 'armed' with a toothbrush for all we know.

Here is the story from the B S O ( Black Students Organization ) itself.
web.archive.org...://www.columbiabso.org/?page_id=118
www.columbiabso.org...

Armed with guns, the students took over Hamilton Hall, and locked the building from the inside. After some time in Hamilton, the black students told the white sympathizers, many of whom were members of Students for a Democratic Society, to leave and contribute by taking over other buildings on campus. They did, effectively shutting down the university. The President of the university ordered the NYPD to smother the protest by force, aided by white athletes and members of the ROTC. Ironically it was the white students in other buildings who bore the brunt of the police storming. Had the police broken into Hamilton, they may have suffered casualties at the hands of the sisters and brothers inside.

In 1970, a group of armed black students seized the abandoned ROTC office on the first floor of Hartley Hall. The students, joined by the then State Senator David Patterson renamed the space the Malcolm X lounge, in honor of a man who recognized the importance of territory as a basis for nationhood. Subsequently, murals were painted on the walls depicting black leaders such as Marcus Garvey and Sekou Toure.

Now I do believe if the students were not Armed, the B S O would not have mentioned them being armed and that Organization would have Criticized any other reporter for making such a statement,,, Don't You?