Michael Kay Involvement in an issue regarding the Viet Kong Flag

Michael Kay Involvement in an issue regarding the Viet Kong Flag

Michael Kay Advocates for free speech

After reading the letter printed in the "comment" column of the October 7 issue of QUAD ANGLES it became apparent that the gentlemen who submitted the letter must have had their view obstructed on Wednesday evening, October 1. Since the tone of the letter seemed somewhat biased it would not be too difficult for an objective mind to read through the foliage into the facts. However, I do believe that some of these facts need clarification. The first discrepancy appears in the number of people from Delaware SDS who were present. The letter stated that there were three members present, I believe the correct number is five. Concerning the adjournment of of the SAC meeting and the calling of the impromptu meeting the letter states that "The SDS members voiced one objection" to the move, I believe there were two, one was "that's a cop out" and the other "b ". This would Indicate to me that the SDS had come to the meeting In hopes of having a confrontation and were disappointed when it appeared that there would be no trouble. Let me point out that the proceeding sentence is merely opinion. The facts as related by the letter concerning the Incident with the Viet Cong flag are of particular interest to me since I was the "hysterical student" involved in the episode. I had been watching the group from Delaware since their objections to the adjournment and watched them uncover a Viet Cong flag which they had In their possession. When I recognized the flag I reported its presence to captain Urpine who contacted Officer Fritz and the three of us approached the five. Captain Urblne asked the group to show their LD.'s. During this time I had shown my security badge, in order to identify myself as a patrolman. As the letter states, "of course they had none." They objected to being questioned on the subject and stated that they didn't need any identification. Because of some personal experiences I have had with the Viet Cong flag I have feelings towards it which make me believe that its display in this college or anywhere in the free world is an affront to free and humane people everywhere. Granted, these feelings tend to make me react in a way which some may describe as hysterical and others as patriotic. When the group declared they needed no identification to be present I opened my wallet and showed them a membership card to the Disabled American Veterans chapter 14, based in Philadelphia. I then told them to get "that g. . . - d. ... rag out of here.''' The letter here states that I then attacked the leader of the group. This I did not do. I did grab the flag and try to rip it from the stick to which It was nailed. The only physical contact made by me with the group were "I don't think there is a legal question." By TERRY COHEN In the present conflict over the Student Activist Committee's and Students for a Democratic Society's use of Lawrence lounge, the question of legality has arisen--legality, not on a state or national level, but on the level of a college community. The question: Is It legal for the administration to expel a group of students from a college building? No Legal Question "I don't think there Is a legal question," said Walter Blair, Assistant Director of Facllitites. "We're talking about administering a building for 6000 students . . .The world legality is an assumption on (SAC and SDS's) part." Blair further explained that with the numerous organizations on campus, some rules must prevail governing the use of campus facilities. One of these rules is that a group not recognized by the administration can not reserve a room for its meeting. Free to Meet However, SAC and SDS are free to meet In the lounge as long as they do not try to reserve the room In advance; in other words, If they hold an impromptu meeting, no one can say anything. Blair and Mrs. Elinor Taylor, acting Dean of Student Affairs, said that the matter is "far removed from (their) hands." Mrs. Taylor also stated that "any question dealing with legality will not be debated or answered in this office." Two Issues Dr. Michael Kay, a member of the New University Conference commented upon two Issues which he felt were important in this matter. The first is that of policy-making right concerning the use of rooms for meetings. "Control over the allocation of rooms," he said, "should be primarily in the hands of the student body and faculty. Presumptuous and arbitrary ruling by the administration is out of order." Basic Presuppositions In discussing the second issue, Dr. Kay asked, "What should be the basic presuppositions that prevail among the policy-makers?" His answer was threefold: 1. "Freedom of access to campus facilities should take precedence over conflicting demands or needs (except when a clear and present danger exists). 2. "The acceptance of freedom of expression of different value systems should be reflected in the use of rooms. By no means should room scheduling be a means whereby opinions and symbolic acts, or organizations, that are considered to be undesirable by the administration, or by anyone else on campus, are denied expression.3. "Students and student organizations, whether they are officially recognized or not, should have access to these rooms." Alleged 'Threat" Dr. Kay also discussed the alleged "threat" that SDS imposes on campus. He disagrees that "12 or 15 students, that's all" are threatening the campus. "The threat to academic freedom, student freedoms, and faculty and student rights," he said, "comes primarily from the board of trustees, the administration, and those faculty and students who feel that they have a right to determine just what ideas, values, and organizations can exist on this campus." the repeated punches that the group delivered to my head and face while I held on to the flag. I threw no punches nor did I make any voluntary physical contact with the group, yet the letter refers to me as the aggressor and states that the group did nothing but defend themselves. During the melee which followed Officer Fritz was knocked to the floor and Captain Urbine succeeded in separating the group and myself. After the separation, the group turned and left the building at a gait between a fast walk and a jog while chanting, "Ho Ho Ho Chi Minn." The letter made five separate references to the actions of Chief Burger before, during, and after the incident. It should be pointed out that chief Burger did not arrive at Lawrence Center until at least ten minutes after the group from Delaware had left. Of course the authors of the letter must have confused Chief Burger with Captain Urbine, but the very fact that the gentlemen of the faculty did not even bother to attach the right names to the men they accused of irresponsible actions would put these accusations in a most doubtful position. On Wednesday moring, October 8, I had a conference with one of the co-signers of the letter in question. At this meeting he assured me that the letter was not written for the purpose of scandalous rabble rousing, as it appeared to me, but was instead meant to force President Rossey into a position where he would want a conference with the gentlemen.I then asked this member of the New University Conference (NUC) if this committee had in any way tried to contact Dr. Rossey and invite him to a conference by use of normal lines of communications. He said that to his knowledge they had not. Dr. Rossey seems to be a reasonable man with the best interest of the entire college community foremost in his heart. I'm sure there are easier ways to reach his office than accusations of criminal neglect. If the real intentions of New University conference are to aid the progress of W.C.S.C. toward its goals of fine quality higher education they should easily be able to meet with Dr. Rossey. However some people believe that progress comes not from reason but from turmoil. The tactics employed by NUC last week indicates that they are of the latter philosophy. I sincerely hope that these indications are false and that these highly unorthodox tactics will not be employed again.

Anonymous Writer

Quad Angles

West Chester University of Pennsylvania

1969 10-14

Aaron Campbell

Digital images in Library Services’ Digital Collections are issued by Special Collections, Francis Harvey Green Library, West Chester University. Images are provided for non-commercial, educational, and personal use only, and are not intended for reproduction or redistribution. For the above purposes the user may reproduce these materials (by download, printing, etc.) without further permission, on the condition that proper attribution of the source for all copies is provided by clearly acknowledging the name of the Library, the title of the web page or resource and the URL at which it was located, please credit as follows: Special Collections, Francis Harvey Green Library, West Chester University, West Chester, Pennsylvania. For questions regarding use of digital materials contact Special Collections (libspeccol@wcupa.edu or 610-436-3456).

https://digital.klnpa.org/digital/collection/wcnp01/id/13787/rec/30

English