Columbia Univ = Hyprocracy

[NIKV69]

Now I have seen it all. On the news this morning they ran a story dealing with the decision of Columbia to allow Iran's president to speak to the students. Now we all know Columbia to be mostly liberal but the students interviewed stood by their dean's decision by using the free speech card and open forum bull****. Ok then how come when the founder of the minuteman project tried to speak he was shouted down a a riot basically broke out? I would be willing to bet a months pay when this man from Iran. Who has been open of his hate for us, wants the jews and Isreal to be basically wiped out not to mention that we have basically good evidence he was involved with our hostage taking. Will be given a civil atmosphere to speak and nothing like what happened to Jim Gilchrist will happen.

Columbia you are a totally being loyal to one side. You have no business even using the term "Free speech" If you are going to try to stand on some ritual then try practicing it first. Let everyone speak. No matter what their policital views. Or keep quiet and don't hide behind the liberties this country affords you. As a college and an organiation you should be ashamed.

[USAF Pilot 07]

Columbia is allowing Ahmadinejad - a man who says the Holocaust never happened, who claims "Death to America" and who supports anti-US terrorist groups - to speak on campus using the whole "Free Speech" excuse, yet they won't allow a ROTC detachment - full of Americans wanting to defend that so-called "Free Speech" - on campus... Am I the only one who sees a HUGE problem with this?

What a truly sad state of affairs....

[hiss srq]

I have given up with even careing about that liberal infested **** hole. There has always been a double standard there.

[adam613]

The grapevine is telling me there's going to be a real ****storm at Columbia tomorrow. The Minutemen thing wasn't caused by liberals; it was caused by a group of people, mostly from the International Socialist Organization, that will use any excuse to start an out-of-hand protest. They tried to do the same thing to John Kerry in 2004, but it didn't work. But there is a much broader group organizing to protest Ahmadinejad: liberals, conservatives, Jews, students at every school in the city...it's going to be interesting.

[NcSchu]

You're applying the actions of a group of students to the whole university, first of all. Second of all, the school did allow Gilchrist to speak just like they're allowing Ahmadinejad to speak, they can't control the way the students act towards what the speakers are talking about. Like Adam said, just like there were groups that disagreed with Gilchrist and staged protest, there are plenty of groups liable to stage protest against Ahmadinejad. I have a feeling that there will be a Q & A session and I have a feeling that a lot of scathing questions will be asked. I also have a feeling that there will be too much security to permit another "riot" but that there will be a lot of protesting. There's no issue here.

[Matt Molnar]

I don't see this as a problem. Columbia is home to the country's most prestigious journalism school, and Ahmadinejad is one of today's most important newsmakers, no matter how deplorable a person he is. I think it would be foolish for them to pass up such an opportunity. As long as there is a Q&A session, which I understand there will be, I don't think it's a problem. CU's dean said in an interview yesterday that he would have allowed Hitler to speak as long as he would have been open to questions from the students and faculty.

[NIKV69]

You're applying the actions of a group of students to the whole university, first of all.

When the protestors began to shout at Gilchrist the campus police sat there and did nothing, the students did nothing. They spoke as a whole not a part.

they can't control the way the students act towards what the speakers are talking about

So the school has no control over it's students? That's telling.

there are plenty of groups liable to stage protest against Ahmadinejad

I doubt it but I will watch and see. I am leaning more toward the students cheering when he starts in with his anti Bush rhetoric.

[PhilDernerJr]

I have to agre with Nick, though I hope we are wrong.

It is most unfortunate that college kids and "Union Square'ers" don't know the difference between being taking an anti-war stance and abetting the enemy.

[adam613]

I have to agre with Nick, though I hope we are wrong.

I've talked to about 20 people who are planning protests. You're wrong.

[PhilDernerJr]

Good.

[adam613]

Unless the socialists manage to take over again. But given the quantity of anti-Iran protesting that is supposed to happen, that isn't likely. On the other hand, unlike the Minutemen guy, I seriously doubt campus security will sit on their hands for this. In fact, I'd be surprised if campus security even gets to do security...this is a "head" of "state" we're talking about.

(The International Socialist Organization DOES know the difference between taking an anti-war stance and being anti-American, and they choose the latter as loudly as they possibly can.)

(There are at least two Jewish groups planning protests. A lot of Jews are pro-Bush because they think he's pro-Israel.)

[NcSchu]

The protests that occurred with Gilchrist were intensely organized by a couple specific student groups, they weren't organized by the university, which is what you seemed to imply, therefore the university isn't being hypocritical. And anyway, we can't judge the situation before Ahmadinejad even makes his appearance, you're comparing the actions that occurred during Gilcrhist's speech with actions that haven't occurred yet.

Let's stop being paranoid. Being liberal doesn't mean anti-American, being socialist doesn't mean anti-American, being anti-war doesn't mean anti-American. Everyone's perception of anti-American is different and "anti-American" is just such a vague phrase anyway that, in my opinion, using it just shows that you have no real argument.

[USAF Pilot 07]

NcSchu:

Do you not see a problem with Columbia inviting a terrorist who repeatedly advocates "Death to America", who claims the Holocaust is a myth and who funds terrorist groups, to come speak at their school, all the while disallowing an ROTC detachment, who's produced such graduates such as Eisenhower and whose campus is littered with statues and paintings of historic military men, to be "re-stood-up"?

At one point, Columbia used to graduate more officers than the Naval Academy... Now, Columbia's welcoming terrorists into its doors, but telling young men and women wanting to serve their country as officers in the Armed Forces to take a hike, and commute back and forth between the Bronx and a completely different school to do so.

While I'm all for "open-mindedness" and intellectual discussion into worldly affairs, even the more controversial ones, I think there comes a point where someone has to step up and take a stand and either say "enough is enough" or re-evaluate their priorities. Unfortunately, no one at Columbia seems to have to courage to do so.

[jran225]

I think people are wasting too much time and energy over this. As GothamSpotter already pointed out, Ahmadinejad is one of today's most important newsmakers and it would be a huge loss to pass up an opertunity to hear him speak. So either you can listen to the speech and try to understand this guy better (as I intend to do) OR you should just ignore it completely. I don't understand why people are going to go out there to protest his speech - he already KNOWS that he is extremely unpopular in the Western World and he KNOWS that his visit to the US comes with much opposition. What are protests going to show him that he doesn't already know? On the other hand, WE don't know exactly what this guy is all about, so to those opposed - please don't muck up this unique opertunity for those of us who want to gain something out of his visit. It's that simple.

[PhilDernerJr]

I think people are wasting too much time and energy over this. As GothamSpotter already pointed out, Ahmadinejad is one of today's most important newsmakers and it would be a huge loss to pass up an opertunity to hear him speak. So either you can listen to the speech and try to understand this guy better (as I intend to do) OR you should just ignore it completely. I don't understand why people are going to go out there to protest his speech - he already KNOWS that he is extremely unpopular in the Western World and he KNOWS that his visit to the US comes with much opposition. What are protests going to show him that he doesn't already know? On the other hand, WE don't know exactly what this guy is all about, so to those opposed - please don't muck up this unique opertunity for those of us who want to gain something out of his visit. It's that simple.

I agree, except I don't understand what you mean when you say we don't know what he's about. I think we know all too well. We're well beyond learning anything from him.