Notre Dame vs The Klan

This is the sort of thing that fascinates me. I was reading Kathleen Parker in the DRC this morning. (I have to make a side note here: as screechingly liberal as the editorial board is, they are still allowing space to the conservative columnists. I will give them credit for that.)
Anyway, Kathleeen writes about a column about a student/employee of IUPUI (if you know that this refers to Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis, give yourself a gold star) who was sitting on his break time reading a copy of the book shown at the left. The cover shown here is the cover of the book the Keith John Sampson was reading that day.
Another student saw the cover of the book, and noting the burning crosses and the word "klan" on the cover, the other student complained to the administration that the sight of the book was offensive to him/her.
If you read the column or the aforementioned book, you would know that the book is a nonfiction account of a day in 1924 when the KKK descended upon South Bend, Indiana, to terrorize the Catholics at the Catholic university of Notre Dame. On that day, there was a huge street battle in which the Catholic boys emerged victorious. The battle lasted two days. This apparently is the beginning of the downfall of the KKK.
The complaining student had not read the book and did not know what was contained in its pages. He or she merely complained based on the appearance of the cover.
The university reprimanded Sampson claiming that the cover of the book was equivalent to reading pornography in public.
The univerisity president stated that the mention of the KKK is repugnant to black people. Okay, but what if (as was the case here) the book is ultimately anti-KKK or shows the KKK in a negative light?
Apparently, the university stopped knee-jerking and found out was was actually contained in the pages of the offending book. The university chose to not sanction Sampson at all. There was no reprimand.
Are there so many people so willing to become so victimized by something so small? Why would the administration of a university even give credence to such a complaint?
Do you think a university would give attention to complaint that a middle eastern person was reading a book supporting the 9-11 attack on the US? Would they reprimand a black student for reading "Stupid White Men" in the middle of any campus where people could see that?
If these people are so smart that they can punish people for thoughts, if their mind reading skills are so good, why are they not reading the minds of drug dealers, child abusers, rapists, robbers, burglars, and murderers to punish them before they can make someone a real victim?
It seems to me that we as a society waste alot of time on these pretend victims. One good thing from the old days that we have set aside is that getting your feelings hurt was something you dealt with on your own. It wasn't the job of society as a whole to feel your pain over every little thing that bothers you. It was up to you to deal with the situation appropriately and then move on (i.e.-get over it).
What kind of tyrants are running universities that they can dictate what material is acceptable or not on a college campus. The last time I checked, almost all universities in the United States received federal money in some form or another, and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution was still good law.
I, for one, do not wish to have my freedoms curtailed by bombastic educators who so hate the United States that they attack it constantly.