As you said here, and Max earlier, letting Mr. Iran President Guy (I can't remember how to spell it, either) speak at Columbia ultimately made him look ludicrous. The President of Columbia may have gone more than a bit over the top in his introduction, having had and passed on the opportunity to say basically the same thing to Mr. Iranian Prez Guy, without exceeding the norms in situations like this, but he deserves kudos for providing him a forum. Ahmadinejad made a fool of himself before the country, and the world, with the global media, and if this was broadcast in Iran (anyone know?), you can bet there were "roll-eyes" galore in his own country about the gay statement. Persia has a long history, and while I can't reel off quotes without digging them up, gays in the ruling classes (as elsewhere) have always had their place in Iranian society, often in prominent positions and for many hundreds of years. He looked like a silly, silly man. D&D. Impeach Mr. Bankrupting America and Find Professional Help for Mr. Iranian Prez Guy.
No one has the freedom to say anything. There is a line. You can't yell fire in a movie theater, you can't say something that's meant to terrorize or inflict pain onto others, you can't slander someone, etc. And he has been granted freedom of expression. His speech is all over the place. Anyone can listen to it. How is he being denied freedom of speech? Because he can't visit a place? What does he need to do there? Why? He's not putting up much of a fight to go there ya know - but you seem to be putting up a lot to defend his right to go there. I really think it's not a good idea for multiple reason not to let him there. He got to speak his mind to the world and our college kids and it's all over youtube. We've lived up to our ideals bigtime. Congrats America, we've done our duty to live up to our ideals. But that doesn't mean we have to let our awful house guest run of the house. He can sit in the living room and be civil, and we can serve him coffee, but we don't have to pop open the dom - you follow what I'm saying?
More about Mr. Iranian Prez Guy... Live From New York, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Unreality Show By Dana Milbank Tuesday, September 25, 2007; A02 "For hundreds of years, we've lived in friendship and brotherhood with the people of Iraq," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told the National Press Club yesterday. That's true -- as long as you don't count the little unpleasantness of the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, when a million people died, some by poison gas. And you'd also have to overlook 500 years of fighting during the Ottoman Empire. But never mind that: Ahmadinejad was on a roll. "Our people are the freest people in the world," said the man whose government executes dissidents, jails academics and stones people to death. "The freest women in the world are women in Iran," he continued, neglecting to mention that Iranian law treats a woman as half of a man. "In our country," judged the man who shuts down newspapers and imprisons journalists, "freedom is flowing at its highest level." And if you believe that, he has a peaceful civilian nuclear program he wants to sell you. Much of officialdom spent yesterday condemning Columbia University for hosting the Iranian leader while he visits the United Nations this week. There were similar protests outside the National Press Building in Washington, where reporters gathered to question Ahmadinejad in a videoconference. "Don't give him any press!" shouted one woman. But that objection misses a crucial point: Without listening to Ahmadinejad, how can the world appreciate how truly nutty he is? "In Iran, we don't have homosexuals like in your country," he informed the Columbia audience. It takes time to come up with profound thoughts such as that, so Ahmadinejad was understandably in a hurry yesterday. His appearance at the press club was delayed 10 minutes when he didn't show up on time at the television studio in New York. Then his delegation informed the press club, mid-rant, that he would have to leave 15 minutes early so that he would have time to pray before his Columbia appearance. The prayer evidently missed the mark, for he was greeted at Columbia with a lengthy condemnation by President Lee Bollinger. He called Ahmadinejad a "petty and cruel dictator" and ended with the thought that "today I feel all the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for." The reception was rather friendlier at the press club, where the sole questioner was moderator Jerry Zremski of the Buffalo News. He introduced Ahmadinejad as "one of the most newsworthy heads of state in the world" and chose written questions submitted by the audience such as "Do you plan on running for reelection in two years?" Ahmadinejad, wearing open collar and glasses, lost his audience at the press club almost immediately. After only one sentence of his speech, the translator stopped translating. "The president is reciting verses from the holy Koran in Arabic," she explained. Completing his verses, he launched into 20 minutes of cheap sentiment. "I believe we all believe strongly that it is possible to create a better world for humanity, and to realize this sublime and beautiful goal, we need to take a look and revise how we view the world around us," he said, going on to mention the "sublime value of humanity" and a "walk on the sublime path." The faces on the dais -- Greta Van Susteren, Eleanor Clift and Clarence Page among them -- met the president's statement with expressions of confusion that gradually turned into boredom as Ahmadinejad eschewed talk of uranium enrichment in favor of Hallmark. "Family is the center of love and beauty," he advised. The man who recently hosted a convention for Holocaust deniers also treated listeners to his thoughts on the truth. "Lies have nothing to do with the divine spirit of mankind," he asserted. Then the lies began. Zremski inquired about the Amnesty International report finding flogging and imprisonment of journalists and at least 11 Iranian newspapers closed. "I think people who prepared the report are unaware of the situation in Iran," the president answered. "I think the people who give this information should seek what is the truth and, sort of, disseminate what's correct." Zremski then raised the specific cases of two Kurdish journalists who have been sentenced to death for enmity toward God. "This news is fundamentally wrong," Ahmadinejad replied. "What journalist has been sentenced to death?" Zremski supplied the names of Kurdish journalists Adnan Hassanpour and Hiva Boutimar, sentenced July 16. "I don't know people by that name," the president retorted. "You have to, sort of, rectify the information channel." A pattern had emerged. Zremski asked about the beating and torture of women's rights leaders. "Can you again tell me where you get this report from?" Ahmadinejad asked innocently. Zremski asked about Ahmadinejad's assertion, at a news conference last month, that Iran is "prepared to fill the gap" of power in Iraq as U.S. influence declines. "Well, again, this, too, is one of those distortions by the press," he answered. And those Iranian weapons showing up in Iraq? "No, this doesn't exist," he said. Who knows? In the wild and wacky mind of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that just might be true. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/01/24/PH2007012401157.gif D&D. Impeach Mr. Bankrupting America.
Freedom of speech is a right extends to anyone on US soil regardless of nationality. Do you wonder why you don't have freedom of speech in China or else where even though you are a US citizen?
I am not sure about that, but regardless, he was given the right to say whatever he wanted. What more can you ask?
Think abt the Gitmo inmates. They were supposed to have rights. But since Bush Admin argue they are not on US soil, so US court has no jurisdiction over what's going on over there.
and honestly, who cares? that's the sort of legalistic dogma that i used to be concerned about, too. but if there's a reason behind the first amendment...something of value...then it should be extended to everyone, anywhere US officials have anything to say about it. let the man speak. the marketplace of ideas will kick him out on his rear end.
Some may have been. But it isn't a matter of what is legal it is a matter of actually believing what the declaration of independence says. It says that the rights we are talking about aren't given to us by any govt. It says If you believe the declaration of independence, then it isn't up to any govt. to grant them the rights, they have them as they fall into the "all men" category. Do you believe in the declaration of indpendence?
How do you mean apply. Does the declaration of independence state that ALL MEN are created equal and given certain rights by a creator as opposed to a govt.? The answer is yes. Does it mean they are independent from England? No. Now the question remains, do you believe in the words written in the declaration of indpendence? Do you understand that it states all men not just colonists, or Americans?
My, aren't we being cute in trying to justify torture and the forsaking of American principles. Tommy J with a few rejoinders: Why do Republicans hate Thomas Jefferson? Why do they make it a point of destroying the ideals and idea of America? And basso, where were you in grade school when we all learned about the Declaration?
i'm sure you may know this, but just in case, the DoL is a statement of principle, not law. i believe the constitution may be the document you want to reference. please show me where the constitution grants the rights given to all americans to foreign nationals engaged in war against us. feel free to search the bill of rights as well. TIA.
So you don't believe the Founding Fathers had any beliefs they considered as being applied to all men? That the Declaration of Independence is worthy, by you, of being parsed, sliced, and diced so that the rights of prisoners of war, putting aside the fact that they are also human beings, can be tossed aside, and international treaties governing those rights can be ignored? And all so no hint of wrongdoing by your hero, George W. Bush, can stand unchallenged. What a piece of work you are, basso, to be sure. D&D. Impeach Mr. Bankrupting America.
From a legal standpoint we did ratify the geneva conventions which were supposed to provide a legal set of guidelines on the treatment of prisoners. Naturally, the adminstration came up with a bull**** title (enemy combatants) in an effort to circumvent the conventions. So yes, our constitution does provide protections to foreign nationals. We just chose not to apply them.
Yeah ! Agree .. that's what i found ! Iranians decry harsh words for president By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer 58 minutes ago TEHRAN, Iran - Iranians expressed dismay Tuesday at the tough reception given to their president in New York, saying his host was rude and only fueled the image of the United States as a bully. ADVERTISEMENT The scenes at Monday's question-and-answer session at Columbia University and the outpouring of venom toward President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by protesters during his U.S. visit could bolster the hard-line leader at a time of high tensions with Washington. Columbia President Lee Bollinger's statement — including telling Ahmadinejad that he resembles a "petty and cruel dictator" — offended Iranians on many levels, not least that of simple hospitality. In traditions of the region, a host should be polite to a guest, no matter what he thinks of him. The chancellors of seven Iranian universities issued a letter to Bollinger saying his "insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with ... a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful." They invited Bollinger to Iran, adding, "You can be assured that Iranians are very polite and hospitable toward their guests." Ahmadinejad's popularity at home has been suffering, with many Iranians blaming him for failing to fix the faltering economy and for heightening the confrontation with the West with his inflammatory rhetoric. But in the eyes of many Iranian critics and supporters alike, Ahmadinejad looked like the victim. He complained about Bollinger's "insults" and "unfriendly treatment" but kept a measured tone throughout the discussion. "Our president appeared as a gentleman. He remained polite against those who could not remain polite," said Ahmad Masoudi, a customer at a grocery store who had watched state TV's recorded version of the event, including Bollinger's remarks. Iranian Farsi channels did not air the event live. Another customer in the store, Rasoul Qaresi, said Bollinger showed that even Americans "in a cultural position act like cowboys and nothing more." Others thought Bollinger's words were unseemly for an academic setting. Tehran nurse Mahmoud Rouhi said the president was treated "like a suspect." "I don't know why he stayed there and didn't leave," Rouhi said. In their letter, the university chancellors asked Bollinger to provide responses to 10 questions ranging from: "Why did the U.S. support the bloodthirsty dictator Saddam Hussein" during the 1980-88 Iraq-Iran war, to "Why has the U.S. military failed to find al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, even with all its advanced equipment?" Ahmadinejad, visiting New York to speak at the U.N. General Assembly, has been greeted by thousands of protesters, many of them from pro-Israeli groups angered by his previous comments calling for the end of Israel and casting doubt on the Holocaust. At the Columbia speech, Ahmadinejad fell into the same sort of rhetoric, questioning the official version of the Sept. 11 attacks and defending the right to doubt the Holocaust. Columbia University faced criticism for hosting Ahmadinejad, and Bollinger had sought to fend off calls for a cancellation of the event by promising to take a tough line with the Iranian president. Iran's state-run radio said Bollinger's comments were "full of insult, which was mostly Zionists' propaganda against Iran." Ahmadinejad's visit comes at a time of high tensions between Iran and the U.S. The Bush administration has painted Ahmadinejad as a top enemy of the United States, accusing Tehran of providing weapons that have killed U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and of seeking to develop nuclear weapons. Iran denies the accusations and has stepped up warnings in recent weeks that it would retaliate against Israel and U.S. bases in the region if it comes under attack. Some critics of Ahmadinejad in Iran warn that U.S. demonizing of the Iranian president has only strengthened his hand and boosted his falling political fortunes. They make the point that under Iran's complex governing system, the presidency has far less power than the post of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who holds final say in state decisions. Ahmadinejad, they say, keeps influence through his image as standing up to the world's superpower. The harsh words at Columbia "worked in favor of Ahmadinejad, who in the eye of ordinary people was seen as wronged," said Ahmad Bakhshayesh, a professor of politics in Tehran's Allameh University. "The protests by Israel supporters against Ahmadinejad outside the university also helped him to appear as a hero for people of the Middle East," he said. Ahmadinejad's international allies have also taken his side. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who is expecting a visit from Ahmadinejad this week, said he spoke by phone with the Iranian leader on Monday after what he called the "ambush" at Columbia. "I congratulate him, in the name of the Venezuelan people, before a new aggression of the U.S. empire," Chavez said. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070925/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us;_ylt=Alzz0AMcRjesC270sTqFKogUewgF
