Ask Me Help Desk - Ahmadinejad at Columbia

Your wish is my command

IRI President addresses students at Colombia University - Irna

Believe it or not .

Chou,

So... you believe in free speech and representation of all points of view on college campusses. I guess that puts you in the same category as John Coatsworth(less), Dean of International Affairs at Columbia, who commented that had Hitler visited the USA, he would have given Hitler a forum at Columbia.

I guess you have no standards either.

Fine, your choice, your funeral, as I say in my signature.

But does that apply to ALL points of view? If the Grand Wizard of the KKK wanted a forum to speak at Columbia, would you grant him that forum?

If the leader of the Minutemen, the group that watches the borders, wanted to speak at Columbia, would you grant him that forum? (Point of fact, a bunch of libs attacked him while he was on stage at Columbia last year in a disgraceful display of epression of free speech.)

If the ROTC wanted to recruit members on the Columbia campus, would you allow it?

If the Archdioses of New York wanted to put a booth on campus to promote Christianity, would that be okay with you?

If someone wanted to place a carving of the 10 Commandments on the Columbia campus's quad for everyone to see, would that be acceptable?

Because, if I remember correctly, Chou, you have quite openly derided religious groups making public displays on government-funded property as a violation of separation of Church and State, said that you agreed with the students who stopped the speech by the leader of the Minutemen (who you categorized as a violent vigilante), and have spoken quite eloquently and correctly about not allowing racism on university campuses.

So the question is, does freedom of speech really apply to EVERYONE?

Personally, I have no problem with saying that certain people, groups and ideas should NOT be given an open forum to the public. Petty dictators, for instance, should be shot, not given free speech rights. But you, Chou, who are so in favor of free speech for Ahmalamadingdong... are you really in favor of free speech for EVERYONE? Or is it everyone except conservatives and religious right-wingers?

Elliot

Everyone is focusing on the tough questions that he received instead of his fantastic responses. He has made a mockery of things we value like truth ,science ,history ,democracy ,feedom . All you have to do is read what he said. When they asked about Holocaust denying he turned it around and asked why the subject was closed to debate and historical research and revision. When asked about Israel he openly questioned it's legitmacy. Columbia for all it's intelligencia was putty in his hands . He received a standing ovation.

Free Speech ? He was like Mordred at the round table.

Tom

I'm certainly glad it was not your decision to make. I'm also glad to see Bush and his administration made a right decision, God knows they haven't made enough right decisions. The argument that “he will go back stronger.. ” just don't fly. Nor that he spoke with dissident Jews holds any water.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

First of all, Bollinger seems to be the one who only believes that an open forum for "free speech" and the concept of "know thine enemies" only apply to dictators and liberals. Conservatives and military organizations need not apply. If a conservative speaker appears at Columbia, he or she will be bum-rushed and attacked on stage. And the ROTC has been BANNED at Columbia for the past 25 years. So "knowing thine enemy" doesn't seem to apply to conservatives, and neither does "an open forum for civilized debate".

Second of all, Bollinger had to take a hard tack on Imadeinmyjodpurs. He was being threatened by state and federal officials with having his public funds cut off at the school's next review. If he didn't take a strong line, he was risking losing state and federal funding for capital improvements and operations. He's no hard-liner.

Third, let's take a look at part of Bollinger's statements/questions to I'mafatpieceofcrap.

So in essence, what Bollinger is saying is that he doesn't expect any civilized or educated debate from I'masadsheephead. So what was the point of the invitation in the first place? If the "reason" for inviting him was in order to "promote civilized, educated debate", and if Bollinger doesn't actually expect any civilized educated debate from him, then why invite him.

Answer: he invited I'madinthehead because it would cause a ruckus that would promote the school and cause lots of free press. But it started backfiring on Bollinger when so many public officials, students and even administrators and staff of the school started protesting strongly against the invitation. On the other hand, he couldn't withdraw the invitation without embarassing himself (he did that last year and ended up looking incredibly foolish). So he had to take a completely different action... he had to attack I'mafagwithalad in order to show that he isn't pro-dictator/anti-American.

I admitt that Bollinger asked some tough questions last night, and didn't let the Mahdi Hatter get away with much. His questions were hardballs, and he pressed them. But the truth is that Bollinger is incensere, in my opinion, when you look at the entire affair as a whole, and at Columbia's history. Put in that context, Bollinger was a guy desperate to save his school from losing government funding after making a huge blunder.

Elliot

You argue the left/right split like a true Party Patriot, or should that be Parrot; I don’t buy it. The Patriots, a very right organization was there just last year.

Quote:

The argument that “he will go back stronger....,” just don’t fly

Here is how Iran is reporting his rock star reception at Columbia

IRI President addresses students at Colombia University - Irna

Quote:

Despite entire US media objections, negative propagation and hue and cry in recent days over IRI President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's scheduled address at Colombia University, he gave his lecture and answered students questions here on Monday afternoon.

On second day of his entry in New York, and amid standing ovation of the audience that had attended the hall where the Iranian President was to give his lecture as of early hours of the day, Ahmadinejad said that Iran is not going to attack any country in the world.

Before President Ahamadinejad's address, Colombia University Chancellor in a brief address told the audience that they would have the chance to hear Iran's stands as the Iranian President would put them forth.

He said that the Iranians are a peace loving nation, they hate war, and all types of aggression.

Referring to the technological achievements of the Iranian nation in the course of recent years, the president considered them as a sign for the Iranians' resolute will for achieving sustainable development and rapid advancement.

The audience on repeated occasion applauded Ahmadinejad when he touched on international crises.

At the end of his address President Ahmadinejad answered the students' questions on such issues as Israel, Palestine, Iran's nuclear program, the status of women in Iran and a number of other matters.

His Presidency was on the ropes with the pressure the US was bringing down and the election of Hashemi Rafsanjani chairman of the Assembly of Experts. This is giving him a boost .There is no doubt about it and it will continue today when he is defiant at the UN.

Jim Gilchrist founder of the Minutemen was bum rushed off the stage at Columbia by those tolerant free speech loving students there . His invitation this year was rescinded

Tom

It's his press; don't it seem reasonable the people in Iran already know this... because Jim Gilchrist was hooted out by students you miss the point, he was invited by the University.

I'm missing your point . He is here on a PR stunt and we provided the stage. This is for domestic consumption; and as I already have posted ;it will be lost on them that we have an open society here willing to tolerate the rants of a jester . The dissidents in Iran are on the run and their only hope is for this clown to go down (along with the whole Mullocracy.) All this is doing is propping him up in Iran and in the larger Muslim world .

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

I'm missing your point . He is here on a PR stunt and we provided the stage. This is for domestic consumption; and as I already have posted ;it will be lost on them that we have an open society here willing to tolerate the rants of a jester . The dissidents in Iran are on the run and their only hope is for this clown to go down (along with the whole Mullocracy.) All this is doing is propping him up in Iran and in the larger Muslim world .

I can't help but wonder what Bush sounds like to others when he travels overseas and gives speeches; I suppose you would agree he does it for PR. Too. Should he be denied a podium because the dissidents want him shut-up.
For example, what do you think about Bush while talking about freedom and equality and then wants a ban on same sex marriage and supports those people who say if you are an atheist you really are not an American.

What Bush is saying is that he agrees with freedom and life style choice for those people he thinks deserve it... the same thing you seem to be saying.

I do not think that Bush would be provided a podium to speak to the students of Iran or many other nations either .

By the way ;there was an issue /controversy regarding GHW Bush when he was VP allegedly making a statement about Atheists not being regarded as citizens. To my knowledge President GW Bush has never made anything close to that suggestion .

Tom

Granted, that's the problem with believing all that is written; but it should be applied across the board to everyone; even if it is in regards to an enemy.

PS EDIT... Half truths are often swallowed, and there is a lot of press that mixes truths with lies.