Iranian speech
Another day, another battle over free speech in educational institutions.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is traveling to New York to address the United Nations' General Assembly. He was to appear Monday at a question-and- answer session with Columbia (private school) faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.
This is the same man who is funding Iraqi insurgents, and providing them with the weapons and intelligence to kill American soldiers.
This is the same man who has openly questioned the Holocaust, and has voiced his desire for Israel to be wiped off of the map.
This is the same man whose nation is constructing a nuclear bomb, against the mandates of the international community.
This is the same man whose country brutally oppresses women and ethnic minorities.
City Council speaker Christine Quinn called Thursday for the university to rescind the invitation, saying "the idea of Ahmadinejad as an honored guest anywhere in our city is offensive to all New Yorkers."
Quinn, a Democrat, said Ahmadinejad was coming to the city "for one reason—to spread his hate-mongering vitriol on the world stage”.
This past week, Columbia Dean John Coatsworth said that he would have “invited Hitler to speak”.
By granting the Iranian President permission to speak, is a university granting legitimacy to the twenty first century’s version of Adolf Hitler? Does it serve any educational purpose?
posted by CitizenPatriot at 7:45:00 AM
6 Comments:
I want to start off by saying that even though i am iranian, i do not support this president in any way shape or form, for he has set iran back many years, erasing anything former President Mohammad Khatami had done with iran. However, i do not agree with some of the things you have written here. First off, comparing this president to Hitler seems very brash and naive, no offense. Hitler conducted a systematic genocide killing millions of people. What has Ahmadinejad done? well, according to a recent cnn article, "Serial numbers and markings on explosives used in Iraq provide "pretty good" evidence that Iran is providing either weapons or technology for militants there, Defense Secretary Robert Gates asserted Friday." And, "He and other U.S. officials have said for some time that Iranians, and possibly the government of Iran, have been providing weapons technology, and possibly some explosives to Iraqi insurgents." lets look at the wording- pretty good and possibly. no difinitive conclusion. (does iraq ring a bell?) Also, there is no proof that iran is building a nuclear bomb. Yes, iran is continuing its nuclear energy technologies, but has repeatedly stated its for peaceful purposes. Again, the US was very sure about iraqs nuclear program, and after years of war still have not produced anything. And with women, Iranian women may just be one of the least oppressed women in all of the middle east. There are very lacks hijab enforcement, and women have just as many rights as men, are able to get a full education, become doctors, lawyers, anything. Iran is no longer under the shah, but an Islamic law, so there are many things that get censored like free speech and thats terrible, believe me no on like it over there, but it is probably the least religous country in the mid east, so things dont get as out of control as they may in places that enforce sharia laws. Ahmadinejad may not say the smartest things al the time, but he's no hitler. And a forum like this would have been very educational and informative, but i dont think much was gained as from the beginning he was faced with taunts and bashing, which some is not too illadvised, but none of what he said was taken seriously from the getgo. im done now. any way, to get a better sense of what iran is take a look at this (iran is not as maniacal as one may think): http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9161934809152225169
11:29 PM
I think that your syntax is very provocative and you know it - just like President Ahmadinejad is when he is rallying his voters right before elections - same as Bush, using loaded syntax to increase his popularity in his "History Book" years. Same as Kim Jong Il, who humored Madeline Albreight and impressed her with the organization of his people and the support they show for him. These are not the most "insane" leaders in the history of humankind - they all are misrepresented by the ridiculous caricatures that ignorant Americans assign to "enemy" leaders. I do not support mass murder, but I think it is a far worse crime to forget the lessons we learn from it by twisting the details. Hitler was not a loon - his people loved and understood Hitler for trying to lift Germany out of the pain a severe depression brings; we simply look at the inspirational speeches and consider them violent because of the "guttural" language. Think about it, we are the only country that has an embargo on Cuba - that's why the embargo doesn't work - the rest of the world does not have this American insensitivity and doesn't care what the name of his government is or whether or not he abides by a Constitution (something that those pinko-facist commies in Great Britain don't have) because he is trying to improve the lives of his people. We ignore the fact that the best hospitals and universities are in Cuba and look at this "massive poverty" problem in Cuba - yeah?! Well how about looking at yourself, blind patriots - defenders of liberty. This is the land of freebies. This is the place to be because of our warped, materialistic view of society. Our poor are better dressed and have ipods - but we have so much more poor in terms of a percentage of our total population - Cuba is a whole lot better off than us. Why? Because of wise leadership. A balanced budget (huh?), low crime, and WAY less money spent on the military. Castro is insane? Bah. Try accusing the men we've all demonized of any problems with clarity, reason, or morality without the intent to provoke debate and I won't be able to respect you. We both know that thinking that shows how much a person can be narrow-minded, over-confident, and (dare I say?) insane and still have the rocks to hurl petty insults.
In response to the post, and not the flaws behind it,
This is huge. Obviously, it'll be recorded and we'll be watchin' it on YouTube. We'll listen to this brilliant politician and say "this is who Myster E. (That's my nickname for you) compared to Hitler?!"
I will mention - this IS the man who is funneling millions of dollars of weaponry into Iraq and Afghanistan - to kill American soldiers - to try to hurt America. He is not the lunatic menace, but he is not the friend either - be wary and smart when dealing with such a cunning man.
You must respect the commonly held view that the Holocaust might have been over-exaggerated, I don't believe that and neither should you, but you must respect the people that do.
I try to support the Palestinians and the Israelis - the same ethnic group that let stupidity separate it. (I do not support most organized religions - once the death toll for them reaches 1 million, it ruins religion for me.) But the Israelis, in their zeal and excitement, did force Palestinians out of their homes and then bulldozed whole neighborhoods out of existence. Muslims fight back for their wronged brothers with guns. Ugh, why did you have to do that?! Israel gets its army together - then decimates you all. Now the bitter losers cause trouble - more death for the next 300 years. Just great. Grr - that stuff just sickens me.
Nuclear power, big difference - if you're the only country that has ever used nuclear weaponry, seriously, don't start up with that same cold poo.
Ha, our country has the right to talk about women and minorities.
Hypothetical Question.
What changed in America after we gained our freedom from Britain?
A) Women's rights improvements
B) Abolishment of black slavery
C) Power, land, and money given to NATIVE Americans
D) More Liberty
(D) is the right answer. Hah. You ever shed a bitter tear just from appreciating irony too hard?
Quinn?! Why do we care what he says? What are we, in 4th grade again?! How about allowing him to be represented by his words?
Yuch. omfg. I used to be REALLY political 8th-Frosh years, but it's times like these when doing that and living in America makes you feel really sick and dirty.
Just be glad that you have a connoisseur of provocative speech in your class - You might let people believe you when you play the devil's advocate (by opposing the "devils" of history). If you intend to confuse, you amuse.
2:13 AM
“This is the same man whose country brutally oppresses women and ethnic minorities.”
Am I wrong, or is it not year 2007? This is absolutely ludicrous, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s views on how to run a nation is absurd. Then he thinks he can come to the United States and tell us how to run a county when he is liveing in the stone age? He treats women like they are nothing. That isnt right. Then we have this Dean John Coatsworth, who said that he would have invited Hitler to speak. What is he thinking? Is he just as bad as the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Is he a women oppressor as well? What does he truley bealive in? Can anyone be sure that he is in it for the greater good? Or does he have his own agenda? We will never be sure.
10:04 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
10:40 PM
I personally disagree with allowing him to speak. What message is this sending? Just like it takes two to make a fight, it takes two to make peace, and although the US, or CSU, may be extending there hand, the Iranian government has taken it, spat in it, and rolled it up. That is the sign they're giving the US...want proof? It's called terrorism.
10:41 PM
oh, miji. we'll discuss this in person. you bring up SOME good points, but some of the stuff you say is so ridiculous...enough! we'll talk on the bus.
in response to Michelle Bakrins (with credit to my friend Taylor, with whom I discussed and developed these ideas): just because Columbia invited him to speak does not mean that they support his agenda/beliefs etc. if they DIDN'T invite him, wouldn't that almost be a form of censorship? the president of the college defended inviting Ahmadinejad by saying something like, ideas should be met with discussion and logic, not censorship. (i'm paraphrasing there). it's good to discuss ideas with people you don't agree with. it forces you to reexamine and justify your own ideas; it works your critical thinking muscle; maybe even gives you new ideas. that's why we have this blog in the first place, for crying out loud! so we can all argue with each other and defend our own positions, even though of course we don't all agree. in conclusion, i think inviting him to speak is in no way a show of support for him, but rather a way to give students a chance to THINK, and also to "know thine enemy." (i think the columbia president said something about that, too, but i can't remember.)
9:53 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home