Summarizing a report from The Intercept :
One of the most dangerous threats to campus free speech has been emerging at the highest levels of the University of California system, the sprawling collection of 10 campuses that includes UCLA and UC Berkeley. The university's governing Board of Regents, with the support of University President and former Director of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, has been attempting to adopt new speech codes that -- in the name of combating "anti-Semitism" -- would formally ban various forms of Israel criticism and anti-Israel activism.
[...]
One of the Regents most vocally advocating for the most stringent version of the speech code is Richard Blum, the multi-millionaire defense contractor who is married to Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California. Blum's verbatim comments include:" She [Feinstein] wants to stay out of the conversation publicly but if we do not do the right thing she will engage publicly and is prepared to be critical of this university if we don't have the kind of not only statement but penalties for those who commit what you can call them crimes, call them whatever you want."
In short, Feinstein and her husband flatly threatened the university with political consequences if students or faculty found to be in violation of their policy aren't disciplined or expelled for exercising protected free speech.
What is wanted by Feinstein and supporters is for the University to adopt the State Department's controversial 2010 definition which equates criticism of Israel to Anti-Semitism. Perhaps the most ironic bullet-point in the definition warns against advocating a "double standard for Israel" at exactly the same time that it promulgates a standard that applies only to Israel!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 08 2015, @06:36PM
The money you're sending them amounts to 1% of GDP and has been shrinking over the years, you're not actually sending them anything. Now if you stopped using any technology developed there things could perhaps look different, but then you get to kiss most of your high tech goodbye :)
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday October 08 2015, @06:50PM
The money you're sending them amounts to 1% of GDP and has been shrinking over the years, you're not actually sending them anything
That sounds like a great reason to send your own money, but not justification for taking anyone else's.
Now if you stopped using any technology developed there things could perhaps look different, but then you get to kiss most of your high tech goodbye :)
Can't understand why I should stop using things I own and paid for. Wasn't aware it came from the middle east, either. I'm typing this on an HP elitebook 6930p - does HP have a factory there?
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings