Eight MIT students arrested in Apartheid protest
Larry Kolodney
Eight MIT Students Arrested
The MIT Campus Police, assisted by the Cambridge police, arrested
eight members of the MIT Coalition Against Apartheid early Friday
morning as the students resisted the destruction of a shantytown that
had been constructed on the Kresge Oval 12 days earlier.
About 20 MIT physical plant workers arrived at approximately 7AM, and
awoke the 4 people who were sleeping inside of the shanties. They
were ordered to leave. A few minutes later, other Coalition members
arrived and, along with those who had been sleeping, climbed atop
one of the shanties and refused to move, chanting "MIT out of
Alexandra" [Alexandra was the name of the shantytown, after a real
one in South Africa].
William Dickson, senior vice president of MIT, arrived and read a
prepared statement, informing the students that they had 5 minutes to
leave or be arrested. Approximately five minutes later, with no final
warning, the police rushed the shanties and arrested 8 students,
including two who were on the ground, one of whom (me) was
photographing the event.
---------------
The MIT Coalition Against Apartheid is a group of students, faculty
and staff at MIT who are working in support of the liberation struggle
of the Black majority in South Africa. We come from a wide variety of
political persuasions, from Republican to Marxist. For the past nine
months, MIT CAA has been waging a campaign for MIT to divest from its
holdings of stocks doing business in South Africa, which culminated in the
building of "Alexandra Township." This shantytown protest came after
months of entreaties through official channels to the MIT Corporation
were ignored.
The MIT Coalition Against Apartheid feels that the destruction of the
shanties and arrest of non-violent protesting students by MIT is an
afront to academic freedom and tolerance. MIT launched this attack
without prior warning and with little concern for the safety of the
students involved. No specific reason for the removal was given.
MIT seems to have little use for dissent on its campus. (A similar
shantytown at Dartmouth was allowed to stay up for 2 months).
Although the divestment issue is one of great concern to many members
of students, faculty and staff, the MIT corporation has refused to meet with
reprentatives of students or the MIT community at large to discuss
the issue. With this action it has destroyed the first effective
rallying point for political protest that MIT has had in years.
If any individual students or student groups would like to send
letters (or telegrams) of support for the "Alexandra Eight," please
address them to:
MIT Coalition Against Apartheid
c/o Alex Rosen
4 Ames St.
Cambridge, MA 02139
if you wish to indicate an opinion to the MIT administration, please
send communication to
President Paul E. Gray
or
Executive Vice President Constantine Simonides
or
Senior Vice President William Dickson
at the following address:
MIT
77 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02139
--
larry kolodney (The Devil's Advocate)
UUCP: ...{ihnp4, decvax!genrad}!mit-eddie!lkk
ARPA: lkk@mit-mc
Hisashi Todd Fujinaka
>
> Eight MIT Students Arrested
>
> The MIT Campus Police, assisted by the Cambridge police, arrested
>
> William Dickson, senior vice president of MIT ... informing the
> students that they had 5 minutes to leave or be arrested. ... with
One fact that wasn't mentioned was that the shanties were supposed to
be down on Thursday, the day before they were torn down. The
Coalition stated that they were relieved when MIT didn't take any
action (but little did they know).
On the other side, Dean S. Immerman was quoted in _The Tech_ of March
14 (student newspaper) that the administration had not decided whether
to take down the shanties. At the time _The Tech_ asked I don't think
Dean Immerman KNEW what was about to happen.
MIT is another campus where apathy is running rampant. There is a
small group of "radicals" who get arrested and raise hell.
Todd Fujinaka
Larry Campbell
> small group of "radicals" who get arrested and raise hell.
>
> Todd Fujinaka
As Abby Hoffman noted recently, "Campuses today are hotbeds of rest."
--
Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc.
ARPA: maynard.UUCP:camp...@harvard.ARPA 120 Fulton Street
UUCP: {harvard,cbosgd}!wjh12!maynard!campbell Boston MA 02109
William Swan
In article <12...@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU> l...@mit-eddie.UUCP writes:
>[...]
>awoke the 4 people who were sleeping inside of the shanties. They
>were ordered to leave. A few minutes later, other Coalition members
>arrived and, along with those who had been sleeping, climbed atop
>one of the shanties and refused to move, [...]
>
>William Dickson, senior vice president of MIT, arrived and read a
>prepared statement, informing the students that they had 5 minutes to
>leave or be arrested. Approximately five minutes later, with no final
>warning, the police rushed the shanties and arrested 8 students,
>including two who were on the ground, one of whom (me) was
>photographing the event.
>
>[...] MIT launched this attack without prior warning and with little
>concern for the safety of the students involved. [...]
Without prior warning? How did the "other Coalition members" know to
show up to resist? And why were you there to photograph the event if
there was "no prior warning"? Could it be that this event was staged?
Do you not consider 5 minutes warning sufficient? By your own testimony
it was "approximately five minutes later" that they arrested the students.
Is your complaint that they issued "no final warning" before beginning
their arrests? Or is it that they arrested people on the ground as well
as those on the roofs, even though your statement implies that all the
students were asked to leave?
Larry Kolodney
> [lkk@mit-eddie writes]
>>[...] MIT launched this attack without prior warning and with little
>>concern for the safety of the students involved. [...]
>
>Without prior warning? How did the "other Coalition members" know to
>show up to resist? And why were you there to photograph the event if
>there was "no prior warning"? Could it be that this event was staged?
>
>Do you not consider 5 minutes warning sufficient? By your own testimony
>it was "approximately five minutes later" that they arrested the students.
>Is your complaint that they issued "no final warning" before beginning
>their arrests? Or is it that they arrested people on the ground as well
>as those on the roofs, even though your statement implies that all the
>students were asked to leave?
By "no prior warning" I mean that no attempt was made by the
administration to contact the coalition to discuss the future of the
shanties before the decision was made to destroy them.
I was there to take pictures because I was sleeping in one of shanties
when the police arrived (at 6:30 am), and was awoken by the commotion.
Other coalition members were sleeping there as well, and others arrived
from nearby dorms after some quick phone calls.
We are not claiming that those who were arrested (myself excluded)
were suprised by the arrests after the warning. We are claiming that
arriving by suprise at 6:30 am to destroy something which had
significant support in the community, which caused no immediate
threat, and which served an important political and educational
purpose, was an uncalled for action by the MIT administration.