I defy anyone to find a more diehard supporter of the State of Israel than I am but I have at the same time repeatedly said (in connection with the Irving jailing etc.) that racist speech -- including antisemitic speech -- should be challenged, not banned. But the last place I expected to find agreement with that thinking was at a branch of the University of California. But it seems to be so. From a UCSC college we read of their response to an antisemitic graffiti incident:
"Such behavior is both morally impermissible in a civilized community, and is at the same time protected by our constitutional right to free speech. The appropriate response in such a situation, and one which Stevenson has vigorously pursued, is one of educating the community and developing increased moral sensitivity to the issues".
Source
Yes. You read that right. The college identifies antisemitic graffiti as coming under the constitutional free speech protections. No prizes for guessing, of course, that the graffiti were put there by Arabs or their Leftist supporters. If neo-Nazis had put the graffiti up, there would have been no talk of constitutional protections. But I am pleased that they came to the right conclusions, even if it was for the wrong reasons.
More on the Flag
I just had to laugh. Every day I read the online version of the "Sacramento Bee" -- to keep up with the news from the political headquarters of America's wackiest State. They always have a picture or two in connection with their stories but not once can I remember a picture of Old Glory proudly dispayed anywhere on their site. But today we got a picture of it. See below. Predictable isn't it?
The picture came from this story
Update
The story was about flooding and had nothing to do with the flag but the tiny minds at the Bee obviously could not resist putting up a picture that showed a semi-destroyed flag.
