Campus Free Speech

Old Photo of Confederate Flag a Possible Safety Threat, Says U. of Missouri

Swift investigation promised

|

Confederate flag
Dreamstime

University of Missouri-Columbia Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin promised a swift investigation of a three-year-old photo of the Confederate flag that surfaced this week. The photo could be considered a threat to the safety of the UM community, according to Loftin.

The Twitter account FratScenery tweets collected images of fraternities from around the country; the images are scheduled for release in advance, and as it so happens, Sunday's picture featured several people holding the Confederate flag in front of the Phi Kappa Theta house. According to The Maneater:

The photograph was likely taken in the days surrounding a September 8, 2012 football game between the University of Georgia and MU. Three of the five men in the photo are wearing Bulldogs apparel and a University of Georgia flag flies alongside the Confederate Navy Jack.

The photograph drew swift condemnation—and panic—from the chancellor's office:

Today, University of Missouri officials became aware of a photo taken in 2012 at a Greek house located near the MU campus in which individuals displayed a Confederate flag. Especially considering recent events in South Carolina concerning the Confederate flag, this photo may be considered offensive and possibly even threatening to some of our community members. We do not believe any of the individuals in the photo are past or current MU students; however, we will be working to identify those in the photo.

MU officials do not condone any activities that could threaten the safety of our community.

Saying a photograph of the Confederate flag is offensive is one thing. Labelling it a threat is quite another. No one's safety is impugned by the old photo, and it's ludicrous to think otherwise.

Loftin does not believe the participants were students, but so what if they were? His statement implies that they might have faced some kind of punishment. Would UM have eagerly trampled its students' free expression rights to protect the community from the imaginary threat of a tasteless photo?

Hat tip: The College Fix

NEXT: Video Shows Calif. Cops Killing Unarmed Man, Catholic Employers Lose at Court, Should Libertarians Be Drowned?: A.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The TOTAL pussification of America continues….

    And related:

    Pussies watch a guy get murdered on a train:
    http://thefederalist.com/2015/…..a-man-die/

    Money quote:

    ?What I don’t wish is that I had somehow tried to attack the assailant. I am a little bit larger than he was, but I would not have won. It’s scary, because if we had been sitting closer and had seen the attack start I probably would have tried to help, and would have been stabbed.

    Heaven forfend, pussy.

    1. On the other hand, would you want to risk your life for the guy from that quote?

      Yeah, there probably is a degree of pussification. But, I suspect there’s just as much degree of “don’t-give-a-shitification”.

      1. Well, as the author of the article says, “If I was being attacked by a man with a knife, I would want someone to intervene”. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I feel the same. I guess I would feel a moral imperative to fight against the predator, but that is me.

        1. I guess I would feel a moral imperative to fight against the predator, but that is me.

          Not even a moral imperative or *fighting* a predator but for some notion of equality, human decency, and self-preservation, I agree.

          You don’t have to kick his ass to get him to stop stabbing the guy to death and cowering in the corner in no way guarantees your safety (and, IMO, is a strong indicator *against* “don’t-give-a-shitification”).

    2. I can’t say I would’ve intervened, but I at least wouldn’t try to justify my cowardice as anything else.

    3. The ironic aspect of that murder is that the victim was a stereotypical progressive/Democratic/gay activist campaign worker who liked to complain about white racism. He then gets murdered on public transportation in a 100% Democratic city that does its best to ban guns, by a black punk recently released by the police.

      1. Be careful what you wish for.

  2. This has descended into self parody.

    1. Ugh. That is a tasteless remark.

        1. Ugh. You deny minorities their lived experiences?

          1. Is this some kind of random grieved talking point generator?

  3. I resent people who try to make me care about such things.

    My advice? “Toughen up, buttercup!”

    1. “Lighten up, Francis.”

  4. No one’s safety is impugned by the old photo, and it’s ludicrous to think otherwise.

    HATE SPEECH!

  5. however, we will be working to identify those in the photo.

    Dox the fucking administrators who prepared this statement. Every last one of them. Names photos addresses, phone numbers….

    1. Since they’re university administrators, everything but their address is already gonna be on the website.

      And their address is almost certainly in the phone book.

      As I said above, “lighten up, Francis”.

      Two jerks don’t make a non-jerk.

      1. we will be working to identify those in the photo.

        They mean that as a “threat”. They can’t do anything more.
        They’ll shit bricks if someone actually does to them what they are threatening. Even if all their info is readily available to the public. Tell them you’ve forwarded all their info to several “pro-Confederate flag” orgs. Hell, the SCV might even send them a nice letter or make a polite phone call 😉

  6. Old Photo of Confederate Flag a Possible Safety Threat, Says U. of Missouri

    Indeed. No one can deny the possibility that it may be an incitement to sheep-fucking.

    1. I don’t think they require any incitement.

  7. This is what happens when you compromise with progtards.

  8. Okay, so six months ago, Confederate flags were not a threat at all. Sure, some were offended, but we could tolerate seeing them.

    Now they’re the greatest threat ever, raping our women, killing our people. To the extent that even images or mentions of them will make people faint.

    1. Why do you hate progress, you reactionary?

      1. It would be nice to hear someone publicly ask that question–why is it unbearable now but was bearable before? What’s different? The answer is, of course, that it was an opportunity to fan the flames of cultural warfare and serves no other purpose whatsoever.

        1. “What’s different? “”

          You’re going to have to ask Robby why flags are suddenly ‘tasteless’

          I personally think demonizing hundreds of thousands of dead Americans is more apropos use of that term

          1. It’s like he just can’t resist.

          2. As a Southerner descended from people who fought on the losing side of that war, I’d say we’ve paid our dues for slavery, particularly since we’re generations away from the last people who owned slaves. These same people, condemning the South for its culture, history, symbols, whatever, would be the first to say that any other civil war should result in everyone forgiving everyone else. I mean, did Mandela start executing white people when the blacks took over there? Nope.

            1. Mandela was a better person than the average progressive.

              1. It’s so messed up now, this kind of thinking. Individuals are all that matters. Groups are abstractions, as far as attributing human feelings and thoughts to them goes.

                1. Ken Burns, maker of epic Civil War documentary, decides 10 hours was probably way too much to devote to the nuances of the conflict, and decides history is far better understood as a one-dimensional narrative shaped by contemporary politics.

                  Or just banned and shit.

                2. Individuals are all that matters.

                  Not even individuals. Symbols. They gushed and gushed on NPR this past weekend about Bree Newsome climbing the flagpole and taking down the Confederate Flag. They went into the discussion about the flag and it’s racist overtones.

                  Zero mention was made about how/why the flag was originally created or how/why it was put up again in the 60s or that Bree Newsome wasn’t old enough or in any way related to either of those events.

                  Symbolically selling out anyone and everyone in order to make people who have no skin in any part of the game feel better about themselves. I can’t wait for that message to start sinking in.

    2. This calls for an episode of South Park involving a giant Confederate flag terrorizing the population.

      1. I have visions of the Fat Albert episode with the Chicken Heart monster. But the with Confederate flag.

    3. Jonah Goldberg has a nice piece asking where the left’s love for “nuance” in every debate over Islam is when it comes to the confederate flag?

      http://www.nationalreview.com/…..-hypocrisy

    4. A Confederate flag killed my entire family.

      All by itself.

      They’re MONSTERS.

    5. I’ve been looking and looking for videos or accounts of confederate flags attacking people, but I can’t find any. Confederate flags are like ninjas,apparently: only attacking when no one is looking. The cowards!

  9. In USSA pictures are considered safety threats.

    1. Unless they are pictures of Soviet Union flags or any other communist symbols in which case no one is supposed to utter a peep about it.

  10. Having grown up in Missouri and known tons of people who went to Columbia, MO for college, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen it referred to as MU or UM. We always called it Mizzou unless the full University of Missouri – Columbia. I think I’ve seen “Mizzou” on resumes. Too many “M” states, so it’s not very distinctive. Yet the Rolla campus we used to called UM Rolla.

  11. I saw Saving Private Ryan on TV a couple days ago.

    It had Nazis in it.

    Yeah, I was pretty scared. Felt threatened.

    Why does the FCC allow this threatening stuff to be broadcast?

    Where people might see it.

    1. *machine guns*

      *head explodes* *another man falls clutching a ruined stump*

      “F[BEEP]k you N[BEEP]is!”

      /FCCMissionAccomplished

    2. The other day I saw a Bugs Bunny cartoon with Yosemite Sam defending the South. So there was a cartoon Confederate flag in it. I cowered in the corner until the cartoon was over.

      I would have turned on the cartoon “Coal Black And the Sebben Dwarfs” to cleanse myself of such awful hate speech but idiotically that one is banned, too.

  12. Munchkins in a moral panic.

    1. Attention whores seeking attention.

      1. You’re doing a disservice to actual, honest, hard-working whores.

        1. Also, whores are motivated by money; which I can relate to. These people are more just zealots.

  13. Would UM have eagerly trampled its students’ free expression rights to protect the community from the imaginary threat of a tasteless photo?

    That would be one of those rhetorical questions, right?

  14. I recently watched “The Civil War” by Ken Burns. It displayed the Confederate flag multiple times. Worse yet, it portrays the Confederates soldiers as honorable but misguided men instead of subhuman racist beasts. Why hasn’t Netflix removed this hate-filled, violence-inducing travesty from its website? Why hasn’t PBS dissociated itself from this Burns racist? Why haven’t colleges and universities, not to mention CALPERS, divested themselves of stock in any Evil Corporation that helped underwrite this problematic abuse of speech?

    1. My first thought was similar. A photograph of a flag is threatening, so a war movie with the flag must be outright aggression.

    2. I took a Civil War class in college, an entire class!

      1. You misspelled “War of Northern Aggression” Class.

      2. Was there a trigger warning?

    3. Intentions, thoughtcrimes for the win.

      1. “Lee?” What a racist name! You must be a Klansman in a starched collar and necktie.

    4. You missed the part where Ken Burns has retracted the nuance from his historical work, in favor of a Bumper-Sticker-slogan version.

      1. “This is not about heritage,” Burns said. “This is about resistance to civil rights.”

        Dammit, if that isn’t setting fire to someone’s cross, I don’t know what is.

        1. Your speech is not what You say it is = it is how We Say the mob interprets it.

          You have no authority over your own intentions or purposes, and deserve no respect.

          Anyone attempting to show you respect will be destroyed in advance so that no one ever speaks in your defense.

          There are no good people who tolerate unpopular ideas.

      2. To be fair, that’s really all you get time for in a tv interview these days.

        Ken Burns is a turd, though. I’ve met him and he is a giant asshole and very full of himself. And he didn’t even write the script.

      3. You mean to tell me that the bastard is repudiating his own award-winning documentary? That after all the time, effort and research put into it … he was wrong?

        Wow. Maybe there was more truth to my sarcasm than I even imagined.

        What is next, I wonder. Will he tell us that jazz sucks, that baseball is meaningless, and that Prohibition was a good idea after all?

        1. he’s really just slapping a new “Executive Summary” on the front of it, saying, “Skip the details = its all about racists”

    5. Why haven’t colleges and universities, not to mention CALPERS, divested themselves of stock in any Evil Corporation that helped underwrite this problematic abuse of speech?

      I think CalPERS should divest from itself, since if you add one letter to the beginning of its name it becomes a derogatory term for Native Americans…

      1. HTML tags, how do they work again?

        1. [i I dunno?

          1. (My awesome HTML tag joke was destroyed by half-assed HTML parsing.

            You win this round, Reason back-end code!

  15. Good move Reason. By publishing the photo of the Confederate Flag you have effectively warded the SJW nitwits away from this site.

    1. *confederate flag sales skyrocket*

    2. No, it attracts them like moths to a flame.

      1. Exactly. You didn’t actually believe them when they said they felt unsafe in the presence of Confederate flag, did you?

        1. Oh, but this is a picture of the Confederate Flag on a website.

          The other one was a picture of an actual Confederate Flag that was physically near the campus!

          Three years ago!

          It might still be lurking in a back alley waiting to murder them all, after all.

  16. I believe that progressives see the Confederate flag as a symbol of resistance to them and their movement. They have castigated the flag and those who fly it for decades. I remember a comment from Howard Dean about wanting to be a candidate for opponents who drive pickups with a confederate flag. It’s similar to Obama’s categorization of Pennsylvanian opponents as bitter clingers, etc.. They look down on southerners and want to stifle southern pride–which is represented in that flag. Their hatred of the confederate flag and its proponents is what they project onto those who fly it.

    1. They look down on southerners and want to stifle southern pride–which is represented in that flag. Their hatred of the confederate flag and its proponents is what they project onto those who fly it.

      IMO, it’s less about Southern Pride and more about absolute and total domination by controlling the narrative.

      Beating a dead horse is fun and all but it takes real power to convince everyone it was a live bear and then erase it from reality.

      1. I honestly think it is not that coherent. It’s more like a mob. this is the most important thing in the world until the next thing comes along. And it’s hard to predict what that will be. When the murders happened in SC, I would have guessed that we would be hearing about gun control for a while, but then this happened instead.

        1. I honestly think it is not that coherent. It’s more like a mob.

          I didn’t mean to imply specific coherence or orchestration. He said ‘similar to Obama’s categorization’ and I meant to imply that it’s a sort of general feedback loop. The general ‘free shit’/’ban unpopular stuff’ persistent political campaign.

    2. I thought Dean said he wanted to be a candidate who would appeal to the people with confederate flags on their pickup trucks.

      The flag is about southern pride. But also about redneck pride all over the country. And rednecks are a real problem for progressives. They are often poor, but have the nerve to do things for themselves and not buy into the progressive plan to help people like them. They are just the wrong kind of people. Poor people are supposed to be grateful and reliable Democrats.

      1. Exactly, Zeb. Dean said he wanted to appeal to them, but I took it as a condescension much like Obama’s condescension to bitter clingers?.

        Your second paragraph says much of what I wanted to get across. Progressives hate independent folk, probably because of their independence. Liberty is anathema to modern “liberals.”

  17. Well, it probably threatens the safety of the members of that Fraternity. So in a way he is right.

    Especially considering recent events in South Carolina concerning the Confederate flag, this photo may be considered offensive and possibly even threatening to some of our community members.

    You mean the recent events where people from various political orientations all agreed that the flag should be removed from in front of the state house? Or the recent events where a racist murdering piece of shit was universally condemned for his vile actions? Or have people actually convinced themselves that the confederate flag played a role in the murders? What the fuck is wrong with people?

  18. Would UM have eagerly trampled its students’ free expression rights to protect the community from the imaginary threat of a tasteless photo?

    Yes. And if the people in that photo are found to be past students, I’d bet there will be some serious talk about revoking their diplomas.

    1. Maybe Preet Bharara and Niketh Velamoor will issue subpoenas for them!

      Meanwhile social justice warriors will hound them from their jobs and communities.

      That’ll show them for BadThink!

  19. George Will was right. These assholes are in a contest to see who can clutch their pearls the most.

  20. Saying & doing these things about those flags all of a sudden, all over the place, reminds me of the time when it became the thing to splash paint on people wearing fur. Remember that? All of a sudden it seemed to be widely understood that fur was evil & that therefore it was OK to deface it & the people wearing it.

  21. We do not believe any of the individuals in the photo are past or current MU students; however, we will be working to identify those in the photo.

    If they aren’t former or current students then why bother identifying them? Oh wait, I forgot that shaming people for alleged PC infractions is the only thing that gets some of these proggie twats hard anymore.

  22. No one’s safety is impugned by the old photo…

    I hereby impugn Robby Soave’s knowledge of the definition of “impugn.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.