Earlier this week, Anthony reported on Johns Hopkins president William Brody’s recent statements on the controversial suspension of a student over a Halloween party invitation. Today, Mike Adams offers a blistering critique of Brody’s comments:

It is simply disturbing that a college president sees himself as responsible for policing off-campus “breach(es) of civility” including “disparagement, mockery or epithets” that are by his own admission “commonly displayed.” Has he nothing more serious to do with his time than police off campus “discourtesy”? Brody thinks that “common name-calling” is something that “we should agree is unacceptable in our community of free and open discourse.” But Brody fails to comprehend that the massive protests – in defense of Justin Park, not Brody – at John Hopkins demonstrate that not everyone agrees with him. These students are able to comprehend the fundamental logical flaw inherent in the position that the punishment of off-campus speech can be justified in the name of “free and open discourse.” Put simply, one cannot guarantee both a “right to feel comfortable” and a right to “free and open discourse.” Most Americans choose – and would choose to die for – the latter. In so doing, they abdicate their right to the former.

Read the whole article here.