PING!
Posted on 03/17/2007 3:12:15 PM PDT by GMMAC
Free speech--but only for our enemies
David Frum, National Post
Published: Saturday, March 17, 2007
You can criticize Hezbollah even in Saudi Arabia. You can attack Hamas even in Kuwait. But don't think of doing either at San Francisco State University (SFSU).
On Oct. 17, 2006, the tiny beleaguered local band of College Republicans organized an anti-terrorism rally. The students had made paper copies of Hamas and Hezbollah flags. At the rally, they trampled the flags underfoot.
And why not? Under American law, a publicly funded university like SFSU is considered a branch of the government. It must respect all the rights and freedoms protected by the U.S. Constitution and its local state constitution. The courts have repeatedly held that the constitutional right of free speech protects protest activities like the burning of the American flag. So if it's legal to burn the American flag, surely it must be legal to trample the flags of murderous terrorist organizations, right? Right? Right??
But that's not how modern universities act. To them, Old Glory may be barbecue starter, but a terrorist flag is a sacred symbol.
Prodded by the local Palestinian student group, SFSU's student government voted to condemn the College Republicans. The university then charged the College Republicans with "attempts to incite violence," "creating a hostile environment" and "acts of incivility." It set up a special committee to judge the charge -- including two of the student council members who had already voted to condemn the College Republicans.
On March 15, the university held a formal hearing on the charges. If it finds against the College Republicans, they could face financial penalties or potentially the dissolution of their organization.
You might wonder: What on earth does the university think it is doing? Why is it according greater respect to the flags of Hamas and Hezbollah than it could (or would!) to the American flag?
The University explains that the two trampled flags contained the Arabic word, "Allah." According to university spokeswoman Ellen Griffin, "I don't believe that the complaint is about the desecration of the flag. I believe that the complaint is about the desecration of Allah." Oh really?
Imagine, for example, that the local Palestinian students association were to burn a Union Jack, as they regularly burn U.S. and Israeli flags. The Union Jack features a Christian cross. Four Christian crosses actually. Does anybody seriously imagine that the San Francisco State University would penalize them?
That's not exactly a rhetorical question.
Over the past half dozen years, campus radicalism in the United States has taken on an increasingly sectarian and anti-Semitic tone -- and SFSU has been the scene of some of the worst offenses.
In April, 2002, Muslim students organized a pro-Palestinian rally on the SFSU campus. To advertise their event, they distributed a flyer with a picture of a dead baby alongside the words: "Canned Palestinian children meat -- slaughtered according to Jewish rites under American license."
No disciplinary action was taken against the students: The groups that had printed the flyer did not even lose their university subsidy. The university president, Robert Corrigan, did send a letter of protest to the student groups, but if you read it (it's posted at www.sfsu.edu/~news/response/nohate.htm), you will I think be struck by its strangely apologetic, excuse-making tone:
"In speaking as strongly as I have in this letter, I am doing no more than you asked -- working to eliminate discrimination and combat racism. And this is just as much a protection for Muslims, Arabs, and Palestinians as it is for Jews and Israelis. I recognize that these are times of great anguish, as well as anger, and I know that one moment, one flier, does not define this group or its individual members."
The next month, Jewish students at SFSU organized a pro-Israel rally. After the rally ended, a small group of volunteers lingered to clean up. Suddenly they were swarmed by a much larger group of pro-Palestinian students. According to an eyewitness, the pro-Palestinian students shoved the Jewish students against the wall of the rally area and screamed anti- Semitic slogans. The Palestinian students demanded the lowering of an Israeli flag flying from a university building -- and university officials hastened to comply. Again, no discipline was imposed.
There is obviously something profoundly wrong on American campuses -- and not only American campuses, as the unhappy history of Canada's Concordia University reminds us. Apologists for terrorism receive maximum protection for the most vicious bigotry, for menace and intimidation, and even outright violence. Yet that zeal for free speech vanishes altogether when opponents of terrorism engage in much, much milder forms of protest.
This goes beyond double standards. It is a moral collapse.
The SFSU College Republicans will prevail in the end. Even if the university sanctions them, those sanctions will be appealed to federal court and swiftly overturned. It is the universities for whom we should worry. They lack the courage to defend the freedom without which they cannot live.
DFrum@aei.org
© National Post 2007
PING!
It says "SFSU" - however, my eyes saw "STFU". I think the latter is more appropriate.
For some reason this reminds me of a Soviet-era joke. A
Russian and an American having a conversation.
"In the US," says the American, "we have freedom of speech.
I can go to the Washington Mall, and yell 'Down
with Reagan!', and they can't prosecute me."
"O, we have the same freedom", says the Russian. "I, too,
can stand on the Red Square and yell 'Down with Reagan',
and they won't touch me."
Ping
"my eyes saw "STFU""
Damn, I saw the exact same thing.
LOL! Me too! :)
Me too!!! When I read the article, it is indeed more appropriate. What a bunch of lunatics.
At least that College Republican group is willing to create controversy, too many are complacent.
I hope they really ratchet up the nonsense, they expose themselves for the Stalinists that they are, and the people on the receiving end will never forget it.
Newsflash for CINO's (RINO's & red-Tories up here):
Conservatives who stand firm as same generally win elections while voters who want to support liberals usually won't settle for 'liberal-lite'.
Creating controversy is not the goal. Anger belittles us.
Fight for what is right, but do so calmly, because you are right. Your position IS defensible.
Right?
:-)
Where can find something that says "Allah" in Arabic to pee on?
Because Lefties went there to avoid the draft during Vietnam, then stayed there to make it a career. Those guys are getting old, but guess what sort of they grant tenure to... more commie pinkos like themselves!
Besides, Conservatives usually have better things to do, like making money!
my tv-moron neighbors believe that ann coulter shouldn't be allowed to say those things!
si.
which just proves her point.
Ann has her trigger finger up too far over the trigger, up to the first joint. It should be placed centered between the tip and the joint. If I were just there, I could stand behind her and gently reach around.........
"Creating controversy is not the goal. Anger belittles us.
Fight for what is right, but do so calmly, because you are right. Your position IS defensible. "
What's the goal?
Whatever the goal you are referring to, the conservatives are not achieving it on campuses. Why are almost all the college campuses left wing? Why do I hear every day in college that "communism works in theory"? Is this according to plan?
Well, of course the big reason why these campuses are liberal is because faculty ratios are like 7-1 liberal to conservative philosophies. The College Republicans have their back to the walls, if they don't fight back; there goes the only conservative voice on campus.
I actually didn't mean complacent=nice, I meant complacent=inactive. Conservatives are right most of the time; it should be easy for the conservative students to be enthusiastic about their positions with more confidence.
The point is this, the College Republican group did something great! They showed the hypocrisies of view on free speech concerning flag burning in an interesting and news worthy way. What they did is they gave us a story with evidence of the hypocrisy, if the CR club was complacent and inactive, there would be no story, no talk, and no persuasion.
I just thought would congratulate this group for doing something bold and right. Keep fighting the good fight!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.