Ahmadinejad

[alaskaguy]

Should Columbia University have offerred Ahmadinejad a speaking platform?

Two points of view:
http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104304.html
Alalam News

[keepngoal]

i am for it. He will get it in the form of questions that will prove his idiocy. He may not take any questions or refuse some.... But I do enjoy the hypocrisy he is displaying by wanting to talk about unpopular views in our country, yet squashing it in his country.

[Wesley]

We can kidnap him also and give him to Israel.

[VII_Fe]

I have been watching "Geraldo live" and most of those liberal idiots are OK with giving him a forum.

"We have freedom of speech in America"

Yes we do, and they have censorship in Iran. Nobody in Iran is going to see this *** get grilled (hopefully) for his beliefs. They are going to see him "show up" America. Those who will witness this will be the family members of the young lady that was STONED to death recently.

Hey I am all for giving him the stage, as long as the sharp shooters are ready.

FROM MY POST...


http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum/...-columbia.html



Columbia giving a forum to a KNOWN terrorist leader, who will address the following

>the Iranian president’s denial of the Holocaust;

>his public call for the destruction of the State of Israel;

>his reported support for international terrorism that targets innocent civilians and American troops;

>Iran's pursuit of nuclear ambitions in opposition to international sanction;

>his government's widely documented suppression of civil society and particularly of women's rights; and

>his government's imprisoning of journalists and scholars, including one of Columbia’s own alumni, Dr. Kian Tajbakhsh (WTF?!?).

someone want to f*****g explain this to me.

Well I tried to email this jacka$$ to tell him what a joke of an American he was, but his email can't be found anywhere (shocker).

I tried to call but his mailbox is full and no longer accepting messages (good job solid Americans)

Lee C. Bollinger
President of Columbia University
535 West 116th Street
202 Low Library, Mail Code 4309
New York, NY 10027
phone: 212.854.9970

[alaskaguy]

When Ahmadinejad lies he is justified in doing so. Bluntly stated, Islam permits Muslims to lie anytime that they perceive that their own well-being, or that of Islam, is threatened.

link: Islam Review - Presented by The Pen vs. the Sword Featured Articles . . . Islam: the Facade, the Facts The rosy picture some Muslims are painting about their religion, and the truth they try to hide.

[alaskaguy]

In Muslim traditions, it is considered okay to lie as long as it promotes Islam.

Take a look at this passage from the Qur’an:
“Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness (vain) in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.” Surah 2:225

This allows Muslims to lie to others as long as it promotes what they believe to be the “Islamic agenda”. So, if this is a part of some cultural aspects of Islam, is it possible that governments led by Islamic morals are doing the same? Is it possible that Iran is “lying” about their nuclear program (that it is for peaceful purposes only)? I surely don't know, but we find multiple times in history where leaders use religion as an excuse to promote alternate agendas.

[alaskaguy]

Examining the issue of allowing Muslims to lie

Link: Islam on Lying_

[alaskaguy]

Columbia won't permit a ROTC program ostensibly because on the grounds of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gay service members. Oh, and by the way, his regime also executes homosexuals for the crime of being themselves.

Link: Free Article - WSJ.com

[sodakjoe]

This seems to be turning into an essay on why alaskaguy doesn't like Muslims, not why you don't like Ahmadinejad.

The man has his right to his opinion, just like everyone else. You have the right to think he's a hypocritical fanatic. Which is fine. Lots of people think that. But please stop making posts saying things like Islam likes you lying, etc. That just makes you look racist, and really, makes you just as hypocritical as he is. If you want to write about how you disagree with the man, that's fine. You have every right to voice your opinion. So does he. There's no reason why he shouldn't be allowed to speak in a public forum, the same way any US President (no, I'm not calling out Bush) has the same right. Allowing foreign leaders to speak freely is something that our country allows because it is a fundamental belief of the people who made this country. If other countries don't want to do the same, that's their problem. Take the high road, allow the man to speak, and critique him with intelligence after he does so.

[alaskaguy]

Originally Posted by sodakjoe

This seems to be turning into an essay on why alaskaguy doesn't like Muslims, not why you don't like Ahmadinejad.

The man has his right to his opinion, just like everyone else. You have the right to think he's a hypocritical fanatic. Which is fine. Lots of people think that. But please stop making posts saying things like Islam likes you lying, etc. That just makes you look racist, and really, makes you just as hypocritical as he is. If you want to write about how you disagree with the man, that's fine. You have every right to voice your opinion. So does he. There's no reason why he shouldn't be allowed to speak in a public forum, the same way any US President (no, I'm not calling out Bush) has the same right. Allowing foreign leaders to speak freely is something that our country allows because it is a fundamental belief of the people who made this country. If other countries don't want to do the same, that's their problem. Take the high road, allow the man to speak, and critique him with intelligence after he does so.

I call a spade a spade.

It has become as routine for terrorists to rationalize their insanity on the basis of "Islamic fundamentalism." People of the Christian fundamentalist faith are no different in this respect (the Crusades). I have simply pointed out that Ahmadinejad appears to be in synch with Islamic fundamentalistism.

Religion cannot justify atrocities against the United States any more than it justifies thuggery in Northern Ireland. Murder is murder. Even though people like Ahmadindjad use religion to support their views, I suppose that there is nothing religious about it?

[sodakjoe]

Originally Posted by alaskaguy

It has become as routine for terrorists to rationalize their insanity on the basis of "Islamic fundamentalism." People of the Christian fundamentalist faith are no different in this respect (the Crusades). I have simply pointed out that Ahmadinejad appears to be in synch with Islamic fundamentalistism.

I agree with this, but if you continue to refer to Islamic fundamentalists, then use that term, not "Muslims". Islam is a peaceful religion in the same sense Christianity is. If you're going to talk about fundamentalism, then use the term "fundamentalism" when addressing them. It's the same thing as if I were putting up posts about how a Ku Klux Klan (or another type of Fundamentalist Christian) leader were going to speak, and citing Bible passages that the leader uses to explain what he does, and saying, "Christians are okay with racism", when we both know that's not the real point.

[alaskaguy]

Originally Posted by sodakjoe

This seems to be turning into an essay on why alaskaguy doesn't like Muslims, not why you don't like Ahmadinejad.

The man has his right to his opinion, just like everyone else. You have the right to think he's a hypocritical fanatic. Which is fine. Lots of people think that. But please stop making posts saying things like Islam likes you lying, etc. That just makes you look racist, and really, makes you just as hypocritical as he is. If you want to write about how you disagree with the man, that's fine. You have every right to voice your opinion. So does he. There's no reason why he shouldn't be allowed to speak in a public forum, the same way any US President (no, I'm not calling out Bush) has the same right. Allowing foreign leaders to speak freely is something that our country allows because it is a fundamental belief of the people who made this country. If other countries don't want to do the same, that's their problem. Take the high road, allow the man to speak, and critique him with intelligence after he does so.

First off, I should have used the term Islam fundamendalists rather type casting the entire religion.

What limits should there be on freedom of speech? What about the current president of Sudan, or the leader of the Janjaweed militia that is committing genocide in Darfur? What about global sponsers of terrorism? What about leaders who consider the Holocaust a myth? So if these questions have already been determined then what is this excercise taking place at Columbia? Is it a marketing stunt poised as free speech when in reality it is nothing less than a hate speech. Should there be limits on hate speeches?

[Cyclone42]

Originally Posted by alaskaguy

What limits should there be on freedom of speech?

Legally speaking, the U.S. Constitution (and its protections) applies only to American citizens, period. We can shut up Amhedwhateverhisnameis all we want and nobody can do **** about it.

[Cyclonepride]

Absolutely not. This guy actively supports terrorism, and is probably enemy #1 in the war. As far as I am concerned, it would be just like allowing Hitler to speak in 1942. Completely ridiculous.

[ekim121]

This is just another sad manifestation of the altruism that has taken hold in modern society. The idea of "who am I to judge?" While free speech is a cornerstone of our society, this isn't even an issue of free speech. The larger issue is, what could anyone possibly gain from listening to this moron? We know what he's about and how ludacrious he is. Would we have gained anything by listening to Hitler give a speech? Absolutely not, other than to confirm how insane he was. By the same token, there's nothing to be gained by listening to this man speak or giving him a platform.

Furthermore, we shouldn't even be allowing this man to set foot inside the United States. I don't care what we told the UN we'd do to have its headquarters in NYC, the man has taken US citizens hostage and repeatedly called for the destruction of the West and all that we stand for. He is our enemy, and the enemy of free people everywhere. Not only that, but he has a burning desire to destroy us. Not only should we not let him near a stage at a University, but we should've erased him and all those who wish to destroy us already.