An Attack on Free Speech: Scottish university student expelled for criticizing Israel

[Tamar]

BBC News - St Andrews student guilty of Israel flag racism



I've been called a Kraut on more than one occasion because of my German surname, and nothing happened. I've seen American, Chinese, and British flags burned in protest of American, Chinese, and British policies, and those incidents were regarded as free speech.

Why should a student be expelled just because a someone else was "violated and devastated"? If drawing pictures of Mohammed is fine, or soaking crucifixes in urine is free speech, then why not criticism of a foreign state?

So putting your hands down your pants and rubbing what ever was down there on some one another persons property is ok?

He has a right to his opinion, not to handle another persons property like he did.

 

[Tamar]

The flags he is talking about some of them are flags taken down from flag poles not owned by the ones who set them on fire. This is a case of protect the jew just because he is a jew. I dont understand how it is raceist to speak the truth about the jew. A 100% welfare and a 100% llegal state.Who produces 2 things only WAR and HATE.

It is not ok to harass Jewish people just because you don't agree with the state of Israel.

Israel is a country, all Jews are not Israelis and we certainly have many different views on Israel.

What we do have a right to is to not be harassed, hurt or have our belongings damaged because someone does not like the state of Israel.

 

[Tamar]

So any time someone makes fun of me for my last name and calls me a kraut I could claim to feel "violated and devastated" and try to get someone expelled?

Sure, what this guy did maybe was rude, just as calling me a kraut would be rude. But somehow I don't see people getting as worked up about people being anti-German, anti-Scottish, anti-French, or anti-whatever.

Calling you a kraut or making fun of your last name is not the same as damaging your property.

 

[Tamar]

Whilst I agree it was ignorant and certainly was some kind of attack. he would have been surprised that the Jewish boy took it so seriously. The UK national flags are rarely held in any sort of personal affection or require any sort of defence from us, so we do find flag fetish some what strange and very "Foreign". It is only in Battle that we take such things seriously.

I think another issue is that on many college campuses there have been situations where Jewish students have been targeted and that has been especially problematic when it comes to Israel.

For me as a Jew is is more then just damaging another persons property. It is his right to not be harassed because he is Jewish and has an Israeli flag.

He has a right not to be fearful of the reactions of others.

Others may not agree with Israel but every Jew ought not be a target. He was a target of the students hatred of Israel.

My kids will soon be heading off to college and I don't want them to fear harassment from those who simply don't like Israel.

 

[Breathe]

Paul Donnachie, 19, put his hands down his trousers then rubbed them on a flag belonging to Jewish student Chanan Reitblat.

Wasn't his flag.
His freedoms end where someone else's toes begin.


If he wanted to buy a flag and do it, no problem.
Someone else's? That isn't acceptable.

 

[Amill]

One person's rights end where it affects another person's rights. We all have the right to go through life and not feel insulted, or emotionally beset upon by other people. The Israeli student was a victim of bullying, and what the other guy did was unacceptable.

If we had to go through life worrying about offending every single person we'd be pretty limited in our actions and speech. If someone was offended by me eating pork in their vicinity, should I be stopped? Seriously..

 

[Poisonshady313]

If we had to go through life worrying about offending every single person we'd be pretty limited in our actions and speech. If someone was offended by me eating pork in their vicinity, should I be stopped? Seriously..

I find it hard to believe that you're being serious.

Doing something that affects nobody else in someone else's vicinity has nothing to do with disrespecting someone else's private property.

 

[Tamar]

If we had to go through life worrying about offending every single person we'd be pretty limited in our actions and speech. If someone was offended by me eating pork in their vicinity, should I be stopped? Seriously..

Do you really not understand the difference? As a Jew I don't eat pork, I could care less if anyone eats pork in my presence.

This is a case of a person unzipping his pants and putting his hand down his pants then wiping what ever was there on another persons property.

It was offensive, bullying and wrong.

 

[Storm]

I find it hard to believe that you're being serious.

Doing something that affects nobody else in someone else's vicinity has nothing to do with disrespecting someone else's private property.

Do you really not understand the difference? As a Jew I don't eat pork, I could care less eats pork in my presence.

This is a case of a person unzipping his pants and putting his hand down his pants then wiping what ever was there on another persons property.

It was offensive, bullying and wrong.

Did you guys read the post he was responding to? That's a bit too far in the other direction.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

BBC News - St Andrews student guilty of Israel flag racism



I've been called a Kraut on more than one occasion because of my German surname, and nothing happened. I've seen American, Chinese, and British flags burned in protest of American, Chinese, and British policies, and those incidents were regarded as free speech.

Why should a student be expelled just because a someone else was "violated and devastated"? If drawing pictures of Mohammed is fine, or soaking crucifixes in urine is free speech, then why not criticism of a foreign state?

If you think that urine or genital rubbing is free speech, then I need to have a "talk" with you.

 

[Tamar]

Did you guys read the post he was responding to? That's a bit too far in the other direction.

Yes I read the post he was responding to and yes we all have a right to go through life and not insulted and beset upon by other people. The world wold be a much nicer place if all people understood that hurting others just because you don't agree with them is wrong.

 

[Storm]

Yes I read the post he was responding to and yes we all have a right to go through life and not insulted and beset upon by other people. The world wold be a much nicer place if all people understood that hurting others just because you don't agree with them is wrong.

I'm sorry, but we don't have a right not to be offended. If we did, everybody would be in jail.

 

[Tamar]

I'm sorry, but we don't have a right not to be offended. If we did, everybody would be in jail.

You don't have the right to hurt another in your need to offend them.

You do not have the right to damage their property, or lay a hand on them in a hurtful way.

There are limits to what you can do.

You clearly do not understand the difference.

I don't care if you call me names, but when you cross the line that is where the problem lies.

 

[Storm]

You don't have the right to hurt another in your need to offend them.

You do not have the right to damage their property, or lay a hand on them in a hurtful way.

There are limits to what you can do.

You clearly do not understand the difference.

I don't care if you call me names, but when you cross the line that is where the problem lies.

*I* "clearly do not understand the difference?" Then why am I the one pointing it out?

There is an ENORMOUS difference between "you have the right not to be INJURED" and "you have the right not to be OFFENDED."

 

[Poisonshady313]

Did you guys read the post he was responding to? That's a bit too far in the other direction.

I did read it. I also noticed the part he bolded for emphasis.

 

[Storm]

I took the bolding to be pointing out the irony of the statement.....

 

[Tamar]

*I* "clearly do not understand the difference?" Then why am I the one pointing it out?

There is an ENORMOUS difference between "you have the right not to be INJURED" and "you have the right not to be OFFENDED."

You left out personal property damaged. This is the issue at hand. Someone rubbed what ever was on their genitals over another persons property because he hates Israel and it was the students Israeli flag. That is a line that was crossed and he deserved to be arrested and charged.

 

[Storm]

You left out personal property damaged. This is the issue at hand. Someone rubbed what ever was on their genitals over another persons property because he hates Israel and it was the students Israeli flag. That is a line that was crossed and he deserved to be arrested and charged.

No, I count that as a form of injury. If you'll read my first post on this thread, I said the little jerk got what he deserved.

That still doesn't mean you have the right not to be offended.

 

[gnomon]

If you think that urine or genital rubbing is free speech, then I need to have a "talk" with you.

Well, if it's performance art......

Or maybe a new dance craze.

 

[Tamar]

No, I count that as a form of injury. If you'll read my first post on this thread, I said the little jerk got what he deserved.

That still doesn't mean you have the right not to be offended.

I think we all have a right not to be offended, does that mean I will never be offended, no it doesn't.

I also believe I don't have the right to offend others on purpose, does that mean it will never happen? No.