Why would a University ASK a murdering dictator to speak, yet kick the very people who would fight to protect?

Question

them from such dictators off their campus??

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today made the following statement on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia University:
"I still find it astonishing and astounding that Columbia University would welcome the president of a country that has not only dedicated itself to a policy of extinction of the state of Israel, but as he is speaking, most of the lethal and explosive devices are being exported from Iran into Iraq, endangering and taking the lives of brave Americans who are serving. Meanwhile, Columbia University's belief in free speech does not extend to Reserve Officers' Training Corps units being allowed on their campus to attract outstanding young men and women to serve in the military."
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/mccain_columbia_allows_iran_le.html

shaz...this had NOTHING to do with free speech...the ROTC has had ITS free speech silenced.....

pretzeldent....maybe President Bush should do like clinton did....NOTHING....that way we could allow the enemy who by the way is at war with US even before 9/11, to attack in even a grander scale then before...yeah, thatal do it.

celeste...can you give me one example of the right doing this??...I'm not challenging you,..I think you're probably right about this, but I just can't think of anything like this from the right off the top of my head.....

just plain jim....oh I see now....so this animal...no, sorry, this president of Iran is REALLY a great guy and its OUR president who lied and painted this nice guy bad......thank you for opening my eyes to this....oh, and those Iranians in our country who hate this man, they are being paid by OUR evil president to say those lies....thanks for the enlightenment........................NOT!

Holy cow....again, I'll say this real slow for you so you can grasp it.....ITS NOT ABOUT FREE SPEECH!!!...doesn't the ROTC have as much right, no I change that, MORE right to free speech then THIS animal??......WAKE UP!!!

gabycawa.....NUTS!!

Answer 1

Let me ask you a few question, and please be honest.

Do you still believe what Bush said in the ramp up to our wars?
Do you know the news printed almost word for word what the White house said and helped get us into the wars?
Do you know that most people understand that Bush lied to the people, our government and the world?

OK, now that you have answered, consider this:

The press prints what the government says, correct?
The government says that Ahmadinejad is a really bad man, correct?

Why do you believe that?
Because our government, who are liars, tell you that?

Therefore, why do you pick and choose what you want to listen to from our government and press? Especially something as lethal as this?

I hope you get the point and stop believing the crap that should never be trusted from our government.

Bush has put this country in a terrible position of outright distrust.

=============
I never said he was a great guy, what I said is, why do you trust our government when they have been proved to be liars?

So what is it, you believe a proven liar over one that has not been proven as a liar?

Let me remind you of something. Bush said the Saddam has WMD's, that the USA had undeniable proof, Saddam said he did not, even letting the inspectors in unimpeded. Post invasion, Saddam was proven to be telling the truth, and Bush was proven to be a liar.

Who do you trust, Bush or Saddam?

So who do you trust now?

My answer, I really don't know who in the hell to believe anymore. You would be wise to do the same.
=============

Peace

Jim

.

Answer 2

You don't understand the right of free speech. Columbia uses its right to free speech by choosing the speakers it considers more appropriate.
The ROTC has its right to free speech too but not the right to be granted any space, any time, anywhere to do so. Columbia owns the space and uses it as it seems fit.
I don't like Ahmadinejad, not a little bit. But I agree with Columbia that's a lot more interesting to hear him that the ROTC. Ahmadinejad is being questioned and pictured in the western media as a tyrannical president. It's a good opportunity to hear the other side of the story.
On the other hand, the ROTC is just trying to get more people to enroll. They're desperate because they're not able to fill the quotas. And the reason for that is nobody wants to join them. The experiences of the last years show that it's not a good idea. People don't feel like they're doing the right job the right way. Add to that the huge number of soldiers that were left behind once they returned home. No medical attention, no economic support, no job positions, even some that were taken to court for debts with the army (lost equipment, etc.).


Besides that. Ahmadinejad was elected democratically. You may question the election process, but you should question the election process that elected Bush too.
He may seem like a dictator to you, I can see why and I agree that that man has too much power in his hands. Can you imagine? a president ruling a country with no oposition. But he's pretty much following the law of his country. I don't like its laws but I have to give it to him that he's following them. Meanwhile Bush is ruling the country with no oposition. In many cases he's cruching the oposition with the power of the government by using criminal, political or economical prosecution. Just check the cases of Cindy Sheehan or those who denounced misuse of resources in Iraq. And he's not following the laws of the country. The army is overseas and the Congress is giving a tacit consent, that's no what's required by law. USA is in a war without a war declaration because the requirements to get to that point were not fulfilled. The war is illegal.
All that summed up shows that both Ahmadinejad and Bush are dictators (make decisions by themselves) and tyrannical (they do that without oposition).
If we do the maths, for practical purposes, how many deaths can be atributed to Ahmadinejad? (and I'll let you add 9/11, even if there's no evidence whatsoever that he had something to do with it) How many to Bush?
From a practical point of view, who should be stopped first?

The thing is, both are very bad for everyone. They're both using violence to achieve political goals. The same is going on in most countries around the world. It's time to change. And to change what's wrong you need to see what's wrong. Ahmadinejad is wrong but not the way you think is wrong. You have to listen to him and understand that he comes from a different culture, a different mindset, a different society. And yet, he's a murdering tyrannical dictator because he's doing the same things your own president is doing to achieve his political goals.

You have to understand too what are the goals, the real ones.
Ahmadinejad is pretty open about them. I'm sure that he has a hidden agenda somewhere. But basically the highlights are to keep the islamic regime in Iran, eliminate Israel, keep the social standards in Iran by eliminating "undesirables" and settling the regular border disputes. For reasons I can't understand this people are not at ease unless they're throwing explosive stuff over the borders. Anyway, his goals look pretty bad.
Bush is not so open with his goals but you can see the results. To establish a "christianish" regime (tight legislation regulating people's social behavior), elimination of "undesirables" (we've been through this), control of the population by a police state (surveillance, security check points), suppression of civil rights to prevent opposition, reduction of the value of the Constitution by legislating against it (patriot act), concentration of the power (use of executive action outside of the jurisdiction of the federal administration), etc.

And, last but not least, Ahmadinejad's decisions are not really affecting the way you live. Overall, Bush's decisions are changing your life every second. If you've spent one dollar today, imagine how much of that dollar is paying the biggest government structure ever created including the biggest army ever known going through the more expensive war since the beginning of times. What did you get in return? a cereal bar?

Answer 3

Keep your friends close...and your enemies closer.

I could say it is in the interest of free speech, open dialogue..and the assured result of Iran President saying something that will turn the listeners against him....but who cares
....also I think that the military should be able to recruit on campuses since they have lots of education loans..but they should have to tell you the truth too...I know too many people promised the sun+moon and got nothing but a boot to nuts and poop in eye and recruiter just laughed about it..so let's have their honor extend to the recruiting process too.

The big question here is why you are getting mad to the University for having him speak when, no matter what country has done, it is an education experience (even if only in BS detection) and yet NOT upset at the US govt letting him into country...if you oppose him so much why are you not protesting his very feet being on USA soil?

Because attacking a college or university is easy, requires no effort at all.

I think the US should have told this guy to go shove it when he wanted to come here

greatrightwingconspiri> so you didn't read the answer huh? was it too many words to actually pay attention to what I wrote? Also I assume you are fine with the misdirection and bold faced lies the recruiters tell kids since you didn't respond to that. And to tell you the truth I would much rather go to see President of Iran and yell that he sucks than listen to a recruiter. Your comments about Clinton are in error as well. He tried to put a lot of the current security measures in place and the GOP Congress voted it down, he warned Bush about Osama and in Bush's 8 months of power he did zero to address. Not saying Clinton was a saint but he sure as hell did more and is more blameless then our current Dictator Dubya

ruth> I think it does as right now looks like invite was only for purpose of getting him there so they could bash him, but whatever floats your boat.

MenifeeManiac>No..the UN gave him that..the US federal govt recognizes him as the legitimate President, he did not need any claim to legit from a university....come on man..stop playing semantics here. also heads up he is not the dictator..that implies he is sole authority..he is not..The highest state authority is the Supreme Leader, currently Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.


OH NO I got thumbs down..the anti-thought american police have combed thru this question and found my intelligent, rational thoughts..I am doomed

Answer 4

Simple:

There is no such thing as bad publicity. Look at all of the attention Columbia University is getting out of this. Agree or disagree (I personally disagree) with Ahmadinejad's speaking at Columbia, people are talking about Columbia. It makes them relevant.

Answer 5

You people are hysterical.
He was invited to speak, not to plant bombs. Plus, the university setting is a privileged one, where a discourse should be ideally based on its merit, not on the perceived worth of the person emitting it. If anything, the opening comments by university officials were out of place. This is why a university is not Fox News. It is assumed that people are capable of reason and judgment and that they can make up their own mind about what is being presented to them. (I know it's quite a concept to make up your own mind about things without having a pundit tell you what it is). And that's not a recent, liberal turn in the mandate of universities; these standards have been set since the Middle Ages.
Besides, officials from China could be invited to speak at universities and nobody would say a word, even though that country have their own questionable human rights practices. Universities are supposed to be above the media frenzy of the moment.

Answer 6

Um -- he's not a dictator. He was elected. In a vote. Bush sort-of was.

I can't think of who he's murdered. Maybe gays and some others internally. But, again, the U.S. has murdered 1000 people for every one that the Iranian president has.

His real shortcoming is his anti-semitism.

Answer 7

thats the USA for you but that what we are made of thats why we have freeddom so they can do and say what they want and you can say what you what but if you listen to the Columbia university president he call the Iran president a dictator and a stupid person so he said bad thing about him and he had to take it!!

Answer 8

I hope someone can explain this. If they believe in free speech like I do and giving this man a forum to express his views or "question" him as so many said, then how bout letting those that want to join ROTC do so, where are THEIR freedoms? Who has the right to take those away? Same thing in San Fransisco where the ROTC programs were kicked out as well. Its a double standard. Let me have my freedoms, but limit others. Both "sides" are guilty of this. We as Americans scream about freedoms, but conservatives and democrats alike seem to want ONLY those that benefit them! Its so frustrating!


:) Gay marraige might be one example. The right uses religion as a reason NOT to allow it, yet does that not infringe on those that may not believe in God? (I'm not saying I believe this is right or wrong) :)

Answer 9

By providing a forum for the dictator of Iran, Columbia University has given the dictator legitimacy and credibility.

I do not understand why Columbia University decided to allow him to speak; but based upon the opening by the President of the university, Lee Bollinger, they might have realized their mistake too late:

'Lee Bollinger, the president of Columbia, under intense attack for the invitation — one protester outside the campus auditorium where Ahmadinejad spoke passed out fliers that said, "Bollinger, too bad bin Laden is not available" — opened the event with a 10-minute verbal assault.

He said, "Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," adding, "You are either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated."'

Answer 10

Maybe if Dubya and co. had some kind of actual plan for securing the borders of Iraq instead of leaving them wide open (in order to draw all of the terrorists into Iraq like flies to feces) then Iran wouldn't be able to export weapons into Iraq.

Of course, securing borders is something that Dubya and Co. don't seem to really care about. Or ports for that matter.

Maybe - just maybe if this petulant child president Dubya would sit down and have talks with leaders from countries instead of stamping his feet, labelling them terrorists and then sticking his tongue out and saying 'we don't talk to terrorists' then we could make some progress.

Of course, with as idiotic as he is, I don't know if I really want him talking to the leaders of any country...