<p><a href="http://www.columbiaspectator.com/node/26790%5B/url%5D">http://www.columbiaspectator.com/node/26790</a></p>
<p>The site must be getting hammered since the site is having problems loading. But what a disgrace.</p>
<p>I absolutely agree with you, C2002. I understand he also has requested to visit "ground zero". That is even worse, IMO.</p>
<p>yea he did request to visit ground zero...and they told him no just like they should have...personally i think as soon as he lands here he should be arrested</p>
<p>
[quote]
personally i think as soon as he lands here he should be arrested
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For the 1979 hostage taking? Not sure what else he can be arrested for.</p>
<p>By the way, I'll also be interested in seeing what the hooligans who attacked Jim Gilchrist have to say about Mahmoud's "right" to speak at Columbia and whether they plan to silence him out or even attack him. Fat chance they will. I guess, to them, the Minutemen pose a bigger threat to the world than the next Hitler.</p>
<p>If he wanted to visit Ground Zero he should have gone all by himself, without any American security. My two cents.</p>
<p>In any case, I just hope that on Monday he gets grilled (I'll be there).</p>
<p>C2002 you can be sure there is outrage on campus (particularly amongst Jewish students, and for good reason), but they're not going to be immature and rush the stage. The irony is that yes, Jim Gilchrist is right-wing but Ahmadinejad is ultra right wing. And you will not see the people who hate Gilchrist protest against Ahmadinejad too much.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If he wanted to visit Ground Zero he should have gone all by himself, without any American security. My two cents.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think it's that simple. I'm talking out of my rear with this, but I recall that someone on a UN/diplomatic mission from a country we really don't like (and accordingly impose restrictions on) doesn't just have free reign to do whatever he wants in the USA. I think there are visa issues that have to be sorted out.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And you will not see the people who hate Gilchrist protest against Ahmadinejad too much.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Too much, or at all?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The irony is that yes, Jim Gilchrist is right-wing but Ahmadinejad is ultra right wing.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Saying he's "ultra right wing" exposes a bias. People on the left think that nazism/totalitarianism/fascism/etc. is ultra right wing ideology, and people on the right think such is ultra left wing ideology. This is why a linear political spectrum kind of falls apart.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think there are visa issues that have to be sorted out.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>last time i checked you don't need a visa to go to ground zero....he'll be in NY he can technically go wherever he wants but it is a case of security and I think the only reason he asked was so he wouldn't create an international incident over something trivial</p>
<p>
[quote]
But what a disgrace.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think in the spirit of education and open discourse we should provide a forum for anyone who wants to voice their opinion. I totally condemn and disagree with those who rushed the stage at the Minutemen event....you do not have the right to silence someone you disagree with in America. Similarly, we should apply our high standards of free speech and open discourse to foreign dignitaries who want to express their opinions whether or not we agree with them. It is better to listen to people like Ahmadinejad before criticizing or disagreeing rather than just taking whatever is filtered through to you through the media or other such sources and form your opinions based on that. I think this is an awesome event and I'm SOOOOOOOO jealous of hl67 that he/she gets to go.....if i would've known about this earlier i would've jumped on the opportunity.</p>
<p>
[quote]
ast time i checked you don't need a visa to go to ground zero....he'll be in NY he can technically go wherever he wants
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You need a visa to enter this country. The Feds can put restrictions on it -- where he can go, how long he can stay here for, etc. The UN is technically not "NY" or the "US" -- it's like an embassy and has some special extraterritorial status.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is better to listen to people like Ahmadinejad before criticizing or disagreeing rather than just taking whatever is filtered through to you through the media or other such sources and form your opinions based on that.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This isn't the least bit compelling. Unfiltered accounts of what this guy thinks, believes, and says are readily available to any Columbia student. A Columbia student does not need to listen to him in person to formulate an opinion on his views.</p>
<p>Some quick research shows that:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>He's ineligible for a visa because he has terrorist ties based on his role in the hostage crisis</p></li>
<li><p>The Feds can waive the ineligibility bar and issue him a visa (which they've done every time he's been to the UN)</p></li>
<li><p>The Feds can put a mileage restriction on him and did so the last time he was here (25 mile radius)</p></li>
</ul>
<p>"This isn't the least bit compelling. Unfiltered accounts of what this guy thinks, believes, and says are readily available to any Columbia student. A Columbia student does not need to listen to him in person to formulate an opinion on his views."</p>
<p>regardless of whether accounts of what he says are available, one loses nothing by hearing opinions from where they should have originated. If his views are so extreme, then he should have a hard time convincing most people at columbia of them. So any speech by him should be rendered innocuous. And even if he does propagate his 'hate speech', disallowing him to speak serves only to strengthen and then conceal views that allign with his. </p>
<p>At any rate allowing someone to speak and subsequently having questions/debate, is probably your best shot at knocking sense into those who believe in what he thinks. i couldn't agree more with shraf. I am honored that he (because of the high-profile) is coming to columbia. it is both educational for those attending, and should surface anti-Zionist views (and others that ahmadinejad harbors) making those views subject to intellectual debate and likely making them more moderate. I care not for him, and dislike his views, but any attempt at preventing him from speaking is certainly retro-active if you want to counter his dissent.</p>
<p>According to Fox news headlines, his request to visit ground zero was denied. Good. Now if Columbia would just do the same...</p>
<p>^um... Columbia invited him to speak at the forum, I'm quite certain Columbia (at least those in charge of the event and those attending) wants him to visit and speak far more than he does.</p>
<p>this guy supplies many of the weapons that kill American soldiers in Iraq...it is a disgrace to have him speak at such a reputable institution such as Columbia...Adolf junior needs to go crawl up in a hole somewhere and die</p>
<p>
[quote]
This isn't the least bit compelling. Unfiltered accounts of what this guy thinks, believes, and says are readily available to any Columbia student. A Columbia student does not need to listen to him in person to formulate an opinion on his views.
[/quote]
by that argument, all an educational institution needs to do is open the doors to the library and the students all ought to educate themselves. Why have classes?</p>
<p>Hint: the answers are similar.</p>
<p>There was another article in the spec today about the student reaction to A. Since spec is down the best thing I can link to is bwog (<a href="http://www.bwog.net/articles/quickspec_4%5B/url%5D">http://www.bwog.net/articles/quickspec_4</a>)</p>
<p>If you notice, none of them are really railing against A, just Bollinger for his poor handling of the announcements.</p>
<p>Personally, I believe this is the correct stance to take. Censoring A is just plain against the views of Columbia. In fact, the OpEd that ran in the spec went so far as to say that they should have overflow rooms with tv uplinks to the speech as it is going on (because registration for the forum filled up in 90 mins or so). Let him speak. It is our job as students and philosophers to discern what is truth and what is not. We are not mules stuck between 2 piles of equally beautiful hay that starve to death because we can't make a decision (yay plato).</p>
<p>Something I find interesting tho is that no one is talking about the reasons behind the invitation. Right now, the spec is linked to every right wing blog in the nation. We have been mentioned on CNN, MSNBC, and others. No one is giving Bollinger credit for this bit of advertising. I mean, in a world where no one will give A the time of day, here Columbia steps through and shows everyone the true meaning of freedom of speech. This is quite possibly the best bit of marketing ever done. Sure it will draw ire from the right-wing but since when has Columbia not?</p>
<p>
[quote]
this guy supplies many of the weapons that kill American soldiers in Iraq
[/quote]
</p>
<p>we supply more...yes, by we I mean America.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This isn't the least bit compelling. Unfiltered accounts of what this guy thinks, believes, and says are readily available to any Columbia student. A Columbia student does not need to listen to him in person to formulate an opinion on his views.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
According to Fox news headlines, his request to visit ground zero was denied. Good. Now if Columbia would just do the same..
[/quote]
</p>
<p>when you prevent someone's views from being heard and discussed you are in turn lending them credibility and saying that your opposing view is simply not strong enough to counter them and that he would be so compelling as to convince everyone.</p>
<p>"This is quite possibly the best bit of marketing ever done. Sure it will draw ire from the right-wing but since when has Columbia not?"</p>
<p>it'll be sad if it draws ire from the right wing, I'd think right wingers would have sense enough to understand that allowing someone to speak and supporting their views are not related. Hopefully people will realize that this is a bold step towards tolerence of opinion. possibly and hopefully great marketing.</p>
<p>Wow. I am really taken aback at the outcry over having him speak. This is America, we take pride in letting people say their bit. We are then free to argue about it, disagree with them and say our own bit. Or not. Giving him a forum is not an endorsement of anything but the very best American values. </p>
<p>And to take it a step further--where is the line drawn and who draws it? If a lot of people feel strongly? Where does this stop? You either want to hear from world leaders or you don't. One of the brilliant things about Columbia is that it gets them there for the academic community. I may hate everything he says, but I'll defend his right to say it and I give Columbia a lot of credit for standing up to potential critics on this one.</p>
<p>I agree with Sharf's earlier post.</p>