More Timewasters: Columbia U: Over the Top?

[ryyannon]

Umm...err.....

As a liberal Love-Child of the 60s who's now a born-again Conservative, I don't quite know what to think of this:

Well, actually, I do.

I believe it's called a target-rich environment.

[ryyannon]

Well, it is true that the man has a message:

[ryyannon]

And who are we to judge him? It's not as if our society isn't based on violence and repression as well...

(Warning - no kidding this time: extremely violent scenes at the end. These images will haunt you for the rest of your days.

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=1075...mp;fr=yfp-t-501

[Victoria]

I believe it's called a target-rich environment.

And they pink-slipped LARRY SUMNERS for the much worse offence of saying that hey, maybe women aren't as good as men at maths and science. But oh no, so long as Hitler would've wanted to engage in "a debate", Mr. Coatsworthy would've received him with open arms.

Interestingly, Genghis Khan turned Columbia flat down citing conflicting schedules.

[ryyannon]

Charlie Manson is unavailable,

And it's too late for Pol Pot....

Gosh, what's a university president to do?

[ryyannon]

Charlie Manson is unavailable,

And it's too late for Pol Pot....

Gosh, what's a university president to do?

INVITE SLAY! :sss:

[Guest carlsbadrolex]

I dont see what the the issue is... In the very near future, this man will be the leader of our opposing force on an international battlefield. We should invite him to every major university in the country. We should arrange for him to speak as frequently as physically possible... We need to learn as much as we can from this man. Although he is a radical, he is an intelligent man that should not be taken lightly. I simply cannot believe that he feels safe enough to come to this country.

And if Hitler were alive, I would want to hear every word he had to say. Not because I agree with his ideals or actions. But because we should also learn from him. Its difficult to learn from those whom we are afraid to listen to.

I learned a long time ago, the most important thing in a battle (either idealogical or physical) is to know as much about your adversary as possible. Strength is gained by knowing what they think (even if you dont agree). Strength is gained by attempting to see things through their eyes (if even for a moment). This strength can then be used against them later.

And concerning the second video, I hate to break it to you... But everything the man said is accurate. The world is [censored] at Israel, the world IS [censored] at the US and the UK. BUT, the sooner we realize this and POSSIBLY do things to change the worlds opinion of us, the better off we will be. We might be strong, but the simple fact remains... You [censored] off enough people and SOMEONE (or a group) is gonna stomp your [censored]!

Edited September 24, 2007 by carlsbadrolex

[ryyannon]

The 'world' also used to believe that the earth was flat and was the center of the universe.

In some places, 'the world' still believes it's ok to stone a young girl to death because she's been raped and/or 'promiscuous', or to publicly hang homosexuals.

Or that it is the duty of one nation to convert those who do not believe in their relgion as revealed truth - and to eliminate those who will not accept it.

There are times when it's important to establish the difference between truth, dogma, propaganda, and personal opinion - unless one believes that all truth is relative - which adversaries like Ahmadinejad definitely do not.

Beyond that, there are elements of stragegy that you seem to ignore: the mere fact that he's setting foot on our territory and lecturing us as to what's right is seen as a humiliation for the U.S. - a sign of our own weakness and that of the West among the ideologues and strategists he represents.

As for 'knowing one's enemy' - we're living in an infomation age in which everything that is said and done ends up on YouTube or Google for the world to see. Under those conditions, there's no need to give this person a public forum in the very country he considers an enemy, just to find out what he thinks: we already know what's on his mind.

And beyond that, he is under such intense scrutiny and sophisticated monitoring that every time he breaks wind it is known and is discussed at length by concerned intelligence services around the world.

You seem to be substituting the effects of 'what the neighbors are saying' (and who exactly are these neighbors and what might be their agendas, pray tell?) for principles of political and military strategy -not to mention ethics and common sense.

It is a fact that Hitler was on the short list for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939 - despite the fact that there were informed individuals who knew exactly how he got to where he was, what he really was and what his plans were for the rest of the world.

As for Mahmoud, we can consider ourselves lucky if the American lunatic fringe doesn't present him as a presidential candidate next year - if nothing else and as you mentioned, because of the accuracy of his opinions.

[Victoria]

It is a fact that Hitler was on the short list for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939 - despite the fact that there were other informed individuals who kne exactly how he got to where he was, what he really was and what his plans were for the rest of the world.

Ryyannon, I don't think CBR was being serious. Come on now. Adjust the Sarcasm Metre (and remind ME when I need to, too!).

[ryyannon]

I just woke up - and it's clear that it's that time you went to bed.

I'll be quite interested in seeing which one of us has read his post correctly, Miss V.

[Victoria]

I just woke up - and it's clear that it's that time you went to bed.

Not until my Chinese collector "friend" gives me confirmation of the funds I need to send to him (my God, when will my addiction END?).

I'll be quite interested in seeing which one of us has read his post correctly, Miss V.

Actually, I'm praying I'm correct...and not out of one-manship to you...I'm sure you get my drift.

Anyway, the reply was almost tepid compared to the ideas floating around RWI about penis removal. Not Klink's, I'd like to make plain.

[plaifender]

The 'world' also used to believe that the earth was flat and was the center of the universe.

In some places, 'the world' still believes it's ok to stone a young girl to death because she's been raped and/or 'promiscuous', or to publicly hang homosexuals.

Or that it is the duty of one nation to convert those who do not believe in their relgion as revealed truth - and to eliminate those who will not accept it.

There are times when it's important to establish the difference between truth, dogma, propaganda, and personal opinion - unless one believes that all truth is relative - which adversaries like Ahmadinejad definitely do not.

Beyond that, there are elements of stragegy that you seem to ignore: the mere fact that he's setting foot on our territory and lecturing us as to what's right is seen as a humiliation for the U.S. - a sign of our own weakness and that of the West among the ideologues and strategians he represents.

As for 'knowing one's enemy' - we're living in an infomation age in which everything that is said and done ends up on YouTube or Google for the world to see. Under those conditions, there's no need to give this person a public forum in the very country he considers an enemy, just to find out what he thinks: we already know what's on his mind.

And beyond that, he is under such intense scrutiny and sophisticated monitoring that every time he breaks wind it is known and is discussed at length by concerned intelligence services around the world.

You seem to be substituting the effects of 'what the neighbors are saying' (and who exactly are these neighbors and what might be their agendas, pray tell?) for principles of political and military strategy -not to mention ethics and common sense.

It is a fact that Hitler was on the short list for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939 - despite the fact that there were informed individuals who knew exactly how he got to where he was, what he really was and what his plans were for the rest of the world.

As for Mahmoud , we can consider ourselves lucky if the American lunatic fringe doesn't present him as a presidential candidate next year - if nothing esle, as you mentioned, because of the accuracy of his opinions.

Interesting views ryyannon, I myself am a strong proponent to open forum ACADEMIC speaking engagements. In university I was able to see historical and (sometimes)controversial figures like: Queen Noor of Jordan, President of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto, Walter Cronkite, David Gergen, Prime Minister(former) of Israel Ehud Barak, Desmond Tutu and Colin Powell. I'm not saying that I support or denounce anything that Ahmadenijad has said in any of his televised appearances, but I CERTAINLY support any kind of debate or lecturing in an academic forum. I would also say the same of Hitler or Sadaam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Francisco Franco.. etc.

Any dialogue that affords young people the oppurtunity to become active, and take part in our political and/or international system of diplomacy is always a plus. I think that too many "intellectuals" base their decisions on politics and "general consensus" without thinking about the common (usually naive) youth population. What better way for people my age (20s) to learn about things going on in our world, than to hear it directly from the people in charge of the world. Watching Ahmadenijad on YOUTUBE is not the same as having the oppurtunity to ask him questions of your own formulating in an academic forum....

I SUPPORT COLUMBIA's decision!

[ryyannon]

Good man, but no need to scream it - trust me, I can hear you.

Personally, I'd like to see a representative of NAMBLA take the podium at Columbia: I'm certain that like Ahmadenijad, the discourse will be spun in a way as to make us understand that consensual sex with young children is the most natural thing in the world.

The audience at Columbia will be getting little more than 'Peace in our time.'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2520619.ece

As a student, does this sound familiar to you?

[plaifender]

for some reason.. extreme sarcasm just doesn't come across as clearly on the internet as it does in person... or does it...? vaguely it does sound familiar... although I'd substitute consensual sex with young children to: Consensual sex with albino rats.. or maybe even............FORCEFULLY converting any non-u.s. aligned democratic state into a democratic one.....

Thanks for calling me a good man... even though i didn't feel as if i was screaming my "good" man nature at all... if that was the case then I'm sorry for hurting your ears. I heard, when inserted into the ear canal, Novocaine topical gel not only blocks sound.. but also numbs excruciating pain associated with the tempanic membrane..

all in fun :-) haha.

p.s. you need to get to that restaurant i was telling you about.. take pictures then write a a full review here on the forum

[Craytonic]

The problem is, having heard one or two of these sorts of "speeches" before is that they are not really a discourse or discussion, it is just some radical yelling about he hates X for some reason. "Because they are jews!" Whatever. It doesn't really contribute to academic discourse. A regulated panel or debate is the way to go, not a podium for someone to scream trash from.

[ryyannon]

You can bet your best Submariner that our man will be on his best behavoir: it's in his interest to give the impression that Iran with its government of radical Islamic Mullas are peace-loving, compassionate people: if only the rest of the world would understand. Subtext: if only 'Zionist' Israel would quietly disappear and - in his own words - its Satanic lackeys (the U.S. and the UK) look the other way while Iran, Syria and the other usual suspects do their utmost to create a new Caliphate from one end of the world to the other.

Once again, I'm not relaying personal opinions or disinformation: this is documented fact. Of course, one has to take the time and trouble to actually read what's on the program - which is distinctly different from what Ahmadinejad is going to be saying with all the television cameras of the West focussed on him.

His latest pronouncement: if the U.S. tries to take out Iran's nuculear program, thousands of Iranian missiles are going to hit Israel.

Yeah, that's logical....

I guess.

About as logical as the results of the poll "I would rather have as Presdent of the United States: George Bush / Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" on America's premier mainstream liberal website:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/23/224950/843

[ryyannon]

Not to mention a speaking engagement for him in Iran.

As for Columbia - along with the ROTC, dissenting currents of political thought (read 'conservative') are officially banned at Columbia.

I could find the links documenting this rather surprising fact - and probably will ulteriorly - but I'm otherwise involved tracking our man's speech at the U.N.

http://www.wnbc.com/video/13298034/index.html

Q: "Why does your government execute homosexuals?"

A: "Iran has no homosexuals."

Either he means that Iran has already executed them all....or he's been taking lessons from Comical Ali (aka: Baghdad Bob).

[robertk]

I don't like this guy. A real tyrant. ...but we do believe in the concept of free speech in this country .....as long as I don't disagree.

[Victoria]

Any dialogue that affords young people the oppurtunity to become active, and take part in our political and/or international system of diplomacy is always a plus.

On principle, agreed. But that's not what happens in reality.

In reality, if the audience do not like what you have to say, or your perceived politics, they shout you down, ENDLESSLY, WITHOUT MERCY and will not let you continue.

I can give you personal examples, but I'm sure that's not necessary. You know that's the case, plaifender, yes?

However I will say this.

Recently, I went to the University of Miami's three marquee lectures with notable personalities: one, US Supreme Court Chief Justice John D. Roberts. Then, in back-to-back days, ex-Vice President of the United States, Al Gore, followed by ex-President of the United States, Bill Clinton.

For John Roberts' lecture/interview, ladies' had to have their purses searched (with cameras seized, including mobile phones), in tables just before going up the steps of the Convocation Centre. Secret Service were EVERYWHERE. There was a marked presence of local police with dogs all around.

Nothing that you wouldn't expect. This was after all, the Chief Justice of the USA.

So when I went to listen to Al Gore, I thought, oh boy, I better not even take a handbag, because I thought it would be treble the security.

Not a table. Not a search. Not a Secret Service man to be seen. Same for President Clinton. They barely looked at you going in the turnstiles.

What does this mean? I'm guessing they were expecting a lot more antagonism towards CJ Roberts, the "Conservative", than towards the "Liberal", Al Gore and Bill Clinton.

They needn't have worried. There was not a protester in sight for John Roberts, nor for the others either. No Code Pink lady stood up in her pink bra and knickers and disturbed the Chief. No one called him names or interrupted the proceedings in any way.

Miami is just not political, and the UNIVERSITY of Miami is perhaps the least political campus in the US.

But it was enough that they thought they would have problems, that shows you the very different approaches towards people who are "approved" or not by the audience.

P.S.: Chief Justice Roberts was BY FAR, the most eloquent of the three. I was astonished at how badly Bill Clinton spoke, since I expected him to wipe the floor with the other 2.

EDIT: Sorry to threadjack, Ryyannon. Just a few interesting pics of the two ex-leaders of the US, since my digicam wasn't confiscated for the Gore/Clinton lectures, and was, for the Roberts one:

The first shows you people clambering up the stairs to the Convocation Centre, going to President Clinton's lecture.

That side was blocked off for CJ Roberts, with police guarding it in case someone snuck in. The other side was full of police, Secret Service, and tables, checking all people as they went up the stairs. Every single person was inspected, and their cameras confiscated.

No one was inspected for President Clinton/VP Gore.

MORE:

I went by myself to watch VP Gore. He basically gave a live presentation of his documentary (lasted well over 2 hours).

There was no assigned seating in either, it was first-come, first-served, but since my parents were major contributors to President Clinton during his runs for Office, they put in a quiet word with President Shalala's staff, and we got seated a row behind The Rock.

[plaifender]

The problem is, having heard one or two of these sorts of "speeches" before is that they are not really a discourse or discussion, it is just some radical yelling about he hates X for some reason. "Because they are jews!" Whatever. It doesn't really contribute to academic discourse. A regulated panel or debate is the way to go, not a podium for someone to scream trash from.

Of course Ahmadenijad will have his speech carefully and ariculately corrected and viewed beforehand.. just like any other person.. And i'm sure it will be quite toned down. But What i do refer to, when i say "academic forum" was the possibility of average american students to ask their own questions to a man that has heavily influenced american foreign policy during his presidency (more than any other iranian govt in the last half-century)... I view any kind of verbal contact and discourse between world leaders and students as a beneficial one.

In reference to your "scream trash" podium.. what has bush been screaming for the last 8 years.?? At least Ahmadenijad brings something fresh to the table.... haha. what a personality! I won't go into the israel/palestine debate.. but sometimes i tend to agree with palestinian positions on many levels... particularly ahmadenijad's view of the israel/lebanon situation this past summer and the summer before. I wouldn't venture so far as to compare Israel to Hitler (as ahmadenijad did).... but i can read in between the lines.......

[Victoria]

At least Ahmadenijad brings something fresh to the table.... haha. what a personality!

History repeats itself. Again, again, and again.

[plaifender]

On principle, agreed. But that's not what happens in reality.

In reality, if the audience do not like what you have to say, or your perceived politics, they shout you down, ENDLESSLY, WITHOUT MERCY and will not let you continue.

I can give you personal examples, but I'm sure that's not necessary. You know that's the case, plaifender, yes?

V, was the rock wearing his Pam296? haha.. This is very true.. Examples are not necessary, and it is very obvious that Ahmadenijad will be very cautious during his speech. He knows the feelings of most Americans and i don't think he'll do anything outrageously stupid or say anything chidingly. you have to also remember, that a school like university of miami.. not particularly known for its academics in the field of social sciences or arts and humanities.. (i.e. political science, international relations and diplomatic policy..) IS well known for its large populous student body and recognition in the household, big universities are ALWAYS great places for presidents and vice-presidents alike. The speeches given at a school like Miami i can only imagine to be be more "SPEECH" than discourse or "open forum". In comparison to my small school at ELON University where the student population was less than 5,000 students, a presence like Ehud Barack, Noor of Jordan or Desmond Tutu are seen by all students, and in a very "academic type" "town-hall" discussion setting. With questions ALWAYS allowed at the end of the speech (if the speaker is so willing).

A school like columbia which is well known for its law (and in my world), and International Relations programs will certainly be a great place for any international discourse to occur. The forum will presumably be much smaller than what you witnessed with Gore and Clinton and the quality and interest of the spectators should increase accordingly...

should be interesting to see... will this recorded? and aired on televsion?

[plaifender]

History repeats itself. Again, again, and again.

In all seriousness, if Israel didn't have the U.S's support they might resort to the kinds of verbal bashings that iran and Palestinian groups tend to use against Israel.. the fact is.. Israel doesn't need to say a damn thing in this debate... they have the upper hand... the u.s. has got their back....

If Ehud Barack had been a proponent for a nuclear weapons program during his regime and his regime was (imaginatively) a non-friendly counterpart of the u.s he might have become just as well known for his colorfulness against palestine as ahmadenijad is known for against israel......

history repeats itself but doesn't...

[Victoria]

V, was the rock wearing his Pam296? haha..

At the time, I wasn't even aware of the marque.

Oh what a difference a year makes...he was dressed very nicely, in an open-necked silk beige shirt, and matching jacket. He actually got a bigger round of applause than Donna Shalala, when the crowd saw him being seated.

(BTW, he's a Republican, but in Miami people could care less about your politics. You go for the "happening")

The speeches given at a school like Miami i can only imagine to be be more "SPEECH" than discourse or "open forum".

Yes, I agree.

Just to note, CJ Roberts didn't have an open mic. But he was interviewed at length by Jan Greenburg (the ABC correspondent to the Supreme Court), so that counted a bit like a question-answer session. You'll be happy to know that the Chief doesn't own an iPod. She asked.....................

VP Gore had the LONGEST presentation, AND open mic session with 3 students. Well, I left in the middle of one kid's question on the environment (which BTW, he dodged the kid later told me), because it was nearing 3 hours long.

President Clinton didn't have an open mic session either, but Donna Shalala "interviewed" him with questions from the students. You'll be happy to know that President Clinton thinks Ivo Morales is the President of Brazil......................

A school like columbia which is well known for its law (and in my world), and International Relations programs will certainly be a great place for any international discourse to occur. The forum will presumably be much smaller than what you witnessed with Gore and Clinton and the quality and interest of the spectators should increase accordingly...

There is no comparison between the Univ of Miami and Columbia, of course.

But just to note that of the Southern Universities, UM International Relations is amongst the premier of all. It helps that they are located in the building which once housed the Southern Headquarters of the CIA.

And also, please note that I only attended Medical School at UM. My other, British University as an undergrad, was another kettle of fish.

One day, I'll tell you how I almost ran into Queen Sofia of Spain in the ladies, there.

should be interesting to see... will this recorded? and aired on televsion?

Doubtfully. It's a private session, else why use tickets? And recorded, only if someone managed to sneak in a digicam or similar, and record it -- like they did with Ann Coulter.

[ryyannon]

So the little dude enters our territory and in front of an audience of university students and gazillions of people watching on either live or delayed broadcast television, casts doubt on who was behind 9/11, the reality of the Holocaust, and America's domestic and foreign policies. When pressed for clear answers to questions concerning Iran, he obfuscates to the point of putting half the audience to sleep with convoluted answers which invariably lead to one idea: it's all (choose one) Israel's / America's fault.

None of this nonsense ('no homosexuals in Iran') was really intended for consumption by the Americans or even the rest of the Occidental world: it was the equivalent of [censored]-slapping the West - albeit with a velvet glove - to show the folks back home, from Indonesia to Gaza and points beyond, who's on first and who isn't.

Columbia University, in its role of useful idiot, played right into his hands. Elsewhere in America, a full 36% of those polled, stated that they would prefer Ahmadinejad to Bush as President of the United States.

Ahmadenijad succeeded wonderfully in demonstrating - at least to those intent on taking our civilization down - that we're ripe for it.

============

QUOTE

should be interesting to see... will this recorded? and aired on televsion?

Doubtfully. It's a private session, else why use tickets? And recorded, only if someone managed to sneak in a digicam or similar, and record it -- like they did with Ann Coulter.

Uh folks...are we on the same page here?

The same planet?

There were live feeds all over the Net.