The walkways are covered with pictures of teenagers being hanged, presumably for being gay, and men with bared backs displaying the scars of a fresh whipping (flogging was last carried out here in Delaware in 1952 and was legal there until 1972, interestingly). The famous quotation, Israel must be, “wiped off the map,” literally papers the walls of the library. A massive protest is demanded for tomorrow morning. The Fox News propagandists have staked out the main gate, with their mascot, well-known traitor Jerry Rivers, first in line.
The stage is set for a full-on media frenzy tomorrow morning at Columbia University. Whether there will be a useful discussion of international relations is less certain.
I have to teach political philosophy to my undergraduate seminar in the morning — we just got through Plato and Aristotle; Epicurus is up tomorrow; Barak Obama took the same class when he went to school here, if that is of any interest — but in my capacity as the official BMG New York bureau, I’ll live blog the demonstrations and the speech and send you some pictures. You can read coverage of the event in the student newspaper The Spectator here, or go direct to their “Ahmadineblog” here, but if you really want your ear to the pulse of the place, natch, go to the real blog, the Bwog, or Blue and White weblog, started just a few yeas ago.
In college, where the future is now, blogs have already passed their MSM equivalents and become the primary source of news for most students, so far as I can tell. As one of my students described the Bwog to me this morning: “they feed us crack.” That would be, in this case, news. Here is the current state of play in a nutshell:
This tennis match of invective was like catnip to the dozen or so media outlets (Bwog spotted everyone from 1010 WINS to Univision in attendance) gathered in front of the Broadway gates. With camera-people outnumbering protesters roughly two to one, every individual shouting match drew a swarm of journalists keen to jump on the next big escalation.
What do you think of Columbia’s decision to host this address? Should Ahmadinejad be heard?
More tomorrow.
What do you think of Columbia’s decision to host this address? Should Ahmadinejad be heard?
<
p>
Ahmadinejad will be heard regardless of what Columbia U does.
<
p>
The “be careful” part is, just what organization is sponsoring his address. Is it the Uni? Or is it a student organization? Recall that just last fall, the CU Young Republicans sponsored an address by one of the anti-immigrant “minutemen” in a CU auditorium, that led to a relatively minor and majorly childish counter-demonstration (got big publicity, though).
<
p>
Is CU itself sponsoring Ahmadinejad’s address, or is a student group arranging for the address in a CU auditorium? There really is a substantial difference.
Here is the press release:
<
p>
may give way to complete apathy. What do I care who speaks where or how Faux propaganda channel is going to use it ad nausium on the zombinals of the “right”.
I am a lowly American prole living in a highly dysfunctional police state. So I document the fall of an empire on just about a daily basis.
perhaps those words are too much to expect. I hope there will be some talking, some listening, some questions and some answers that showed some thought.
Of course, every other word I use is ‘some’. I know that what I wish for will require some very intelligent, focused, and media savvy people.
Iran exports weapons to Iraq which are used to kill American soldiers and Columbia invites him to speak.
<
p>
Columbia won’t allow the ROTC on campus supposedly due to the military’s stance on gays but they invite the leader of a country that routinely executes homosexuals.
<
p>
Ahmadinejad calls for the destruction of Israel but is an honored speaker at Columbia.
<
p>
Iran treats women as second-class citizens but that’s OK for Columbia.
<
p>
Does anyone else see anything wrong with this?
Iran exports weapons to Iraq which are used to kill American soldiers
<
p>
Maybe the converse is the reason that GWBush doesn’t go speak at Columbia U. The US exports weaponry whose only purpose is to kill Iraqies.
<
p>
Two can play at that game Mr Weebles.
…Bush lied us into a war that kills Americans every day and he gets to speak on National TV when ever he wants.
<
p>
Your argument would make sense if we were talking about President Bush being invited to speak at Baghdad U. Or if we were talking about President Bush at all.
<
p>
How any American can justify inviting this guy to speak while weapons from his country are being sent to kill American soldiers is beyond me. It’s vile, it’s disgusting and it’s beyond even the lowest limits of decency.
Your argument would make sense if we were talking about President Bush being invited to speak at Baghdad U.
<
p>
I had been led to believe that your contention that the reason that Ahmadinejad should not be permitted to speak at Columbia U (CU) was because Iran was smuggling weaponry into Iraq for use–presumably–against Americans. Quite frankly, the US government is quite publicly smuggling–sorry, importing–weaponry into Iraq for use against Iraqis. I’m not exactly sure what the difference is, unless you believe that Iraqis should not have any wherewithall to defend themselves agains American occupiers.
<
p>
But I doubt very seriously that GWBush would be denied the right to speak at CU for that reason.
<
p>
Moreover, at least one of the American mercenary companies, Blackwater, which is close to the GWBush malAdministration has recently been accused of actually smuggling weaponry into Iraq. The puppet al-Maliki regime has threatened to pull their license to operate in the country, but of course they are powerless to enforce an ejection.
<
p>
Regarding your rather ridiculous remark
<
p>
How any American can justify inviting this guy to speak while weapons from his country are being sent to kill American soldiers is beyond me.
<
p>
some of us actually do support the troops. Leave. We don’t have a dog in that fight.
<
p>
Really? You believe that it’s OK for Iran to smuggle weapons into Iraq to be used against our troops?
<
p>
If you can’t see the difference between our bringing weapons into Iraq and the Iranians exporting weapons, then you’re a hopeless cause.
What I believe is that the US should withdraw its troops so that the weapons cannot be used against them. It really is as simple as that.
<
p>
I have a cast iron skillet if you would like me to beat that through your obviously thick skull. (I actually do have a cast iron skillet, but lest anyone wonder, I’m writing metaphorically.)
<
p>
If the US wants to make extensive use of mercenaries in its little adventure in Iraq, it should consider going all the way. Hire private armies and deploy them in regions like Iraq. That, of course, would have benkrupted Cressus, but that’s another topic.
<
p>
As to your last paragraph, please provide an extensive philosophical discussion as to the differences between the two situations. I seriously can’t see any difference, except for your hurrumphing about who the weapons are (preumably) to be used against.
<
p>
If you can’t see the difference between our bringing weapons into Iraq and the Iranians exporting weapons
<
p>
because, as far as I can tell any differences are bullshit. The American government and Blackwater are exporting weaponry into Iraq. Iranians (who knows who) are alledgedly doing the same thing. What’s the difference? We’re the good guys and they aren’t? That’s idiotic.
<
p>
Nobody is making that rather odious assertion. Don’t put words in other peoples mouths. It’s not right and it makes you look bad.
when your automobile has only fumes in the tank because Iran has closed the Straits of Hormuz.
<
p>
However, with any luck there may not be a functioning islamo-fascist government in Iran by Christmas. That would be a nice Christmas present.
I am unacquainted with weapons that are used excusively for the purpose of terminating Iraqi’s.
…Ahmadinejad isn’t passing around a sign up sheet trying to recruit new soldiers. There’s a difference between inviting someone to speak and allowing someone to conduct business.
<
p>
I’m glad Ahmadinejad is allowed to speak. First, it gives many people here in the US a chance to protest him for all of the hateful stuff you mention. Second, the more we document for history the words of leaders like Ahmadinejad, the healthier our society will be in the future – this is why I think it was obscene to execute Saddam. That mofo should have been forced to stay alive and psychologists, intelligence officers, and historians should have bled him dry for every ounce of information he had and put that information into the record. Future generations would have been better off.
<
p>
Someday there will be scholarship undertook to investigate this exact time period in both US and Iranian history – the more we get Ahmadinejad on record, the better for scholarship. This might be an important speech for future scholars, or it might be useless – but it won’t be anything if we censor him and refuse him to speak.
<
p>
Not to mention, if we position ourselves as the land of freedom against the radical violent theocracy of Iran, how does that make us look if we don’t allow someone we disagree with the opportunity to speak?
Being a Holocaust Denier is unlawful in Germany.
<
p>
Nazi’s shouldn’t have been hanged?
Ever hear of the KKK? Do a web search for White Supremacist groups, if you have the stomach. Hate speech is all over the place.
…enacts anything similar to the US constitution’s 1st amendment, I’ll sit up and listen to your Schmarrn. Until then, no.
<
p>
BTW, as I’ve mentioned here more than a few times, the US Supreme Court doesn’t even pay much attention to the 1st amendment’s speech and press provisions.
Is offered the courtesy to speak at one of our allegedly progressive universities, however our own homegrown bigots are not allowed the same courtesy.
<
p>
Even more interesting is the progresive’s disapproval of the right wing rabble at the gates of CU. The same progressives who shout down anyone who challenges their perception of societal correctness.
<
p>
We haven’t come very far have we?
<
p>
Of more interesting note is the fact that several squadrons of IDF F-15 and F-16 fighter bombers penetrated Syrian airspace on 7 September, which was being protected by the latest and most sophisticated Russian radars, and the IDF fighters destroyed a Syrian nuclear site. Yes, the same radar that now defends Iranian airspace. In approximately a week USA will have a second and third carrier off the coast of Iran probably to be joined by a French carrier. There seems to be much consternation and angst amongst the Iranian mullahs and military. Imagine that.
Perhaps you think this is just what the doctor ordered:
I'm thinking that most people (perhaps 4/5 of Americans) would not want another debacle like Iraq and, without the howling of the media to reject even the notion of allowing him to speak, most people would come to the conclusion, if left to arrive at it on their own, that we could all benefit from hearing that we can avoid military confrontation with Iran with some basic diplomacy.
Since the idea of diplomacy runs counter to the administration's (and by extension, the media's) insistance that “You cannot reason with these people”, I think it would do us all a world of good if we heard some reasonable sounds from the podium today.
Iran will not be dealt with as GWB/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz screwed up the Iraq debacle. The US and French Navy will be using MOAB’s,and deep penetrating HE. The Iranian nuclear program will be rendered null and void for the foreseable future. Why do you think Ahmadinejad is here in NYC. It’s to drum up American support to forestall the imminent attack on Iran. The Iranians just found out that they are defenseless.
<
p>
Israel was not kidding when they stated, “Never again”.
The Iranians grossly overplayed their hand, now it’s time to pay the piper. Syria has just been warned that if they launch chemical/bio scuds on Israel that they will cease to exist shortly thereafter. Perhaps countries that adopt genocidal political postures will soon get the message.
<
p>
Life on this planet has never been without strife. It waxes and wains. Just part of the ongoing struggle.
Please defend that assertion with details on how effective a threat Iran poses to the security of the US.
Also, do you think Russia and China will sit back and grin politely while we nuke Iran?
Have you ever seen the movie “Dr. Strangelove?”
No nukes. Six ton, deep penetrating, high explosive. Fuel air explosives that mimic the blast effect of a nuclear detonation.
<
p>
Do I think that that an Islamo-fascist government is capable of mass murder? The answer is yes.
Why abandon reason?
Every vehicle on the road is capable of running you over, yet somehow you manage to struggle through another day with your life.
On the silver lining side of this – after they HEAR him deny the Holocaust, after they HEAR him explain his unilateral views (I read his blog, so have some idea what he believes) – perhaps they will begin to have at least an unquiet inkling of the futility of negotiating with jihad, and may wonder if sharia law in Washington Square is all that appealing.
…Perhaps you can fill us in.
<
p>
Irrespective of that, when we were watching the Sunday morning gab fests back in the States, she was all over the place. It wasn’t as though she was prevented from braying.
<
p>
I suspect that you just want to attack the site at which that Ahamadinajad (however it’s spelled, the Iranian guy) is braying. That’s rather petty, Ms. Porc.
realizes full well that as unlikely as a speaking engagement at CU for anyone in the Bush administration or any conservative politician (R or D) would occur, if it did it fact occur, the 1st Amendment sympathizers (alleged) would not give aforementioned the courtesy to be heard. History speaks volumes.
<
p>
The 1st Amendment in USA is now only applicable to Liberals and nutters. Anyone else with an opposing view need not apply.
<
p>
We now have our own “Bund”.
…you’re going to tell us that Rice does not have enough American TV venues on which she can bray.
<
p>
It strikes me that Rice has been on American TV more than Abadinijad. And that will contine. Rice has more than a bit of an opportunity to bray.
<
p>
As we have discussed here in recent weeks, your 1st amendment issue is rather silly. It applies to government, not private insitutions. Last I saw, Columbia was still private.
Bastions of 1st amendment rights don’t necessarily have
to comply with the spirit or the letter of the law?
I’ll merely point out that the 1st amendment has no applicability to Columbia Univ, a private institution.
<
p>
Now, if you would answer the issue that I raised above, whether she has been denied a venue at CU on which to speak. For a number of years, she has been provided with venues to speak on mass media in the US, where she will likely reach a much large audience, so what is the issue with her speaking at a little auditorium on CU?
Peter:
<
p>
You succinctly captured my thoughts and undoubtedly many other BMGers (the silent majority) about the silver lining of Columbia allowing Ahmadinejad allowing to speak on campus.
<
p>
However, sharia law would be implemented on Morningside Heights (the locale of Columbia) and NOT Washington Square, (the locale of New York University). Although the percentage of clueless liberals in both locales is roughly the same in each different NYC neighborhood.
<
p>
Pat Buchanan has a better chance of being invited to speak at Columbia then Condoleeza Rice. The only invite Condoleeza Rice could hope to obtain from Columbia would be one from the Music Department to perform a piano concerto from Chopin.
…so ruthless is their enforcement of acceptable beige vanilla mental diversity – although I suppose it IS a little like mixing up Harvard and Yale.
You really think Iran could topple the US government? Really?
What will really interest me is how ahmadinejad and his utterances are received by the students and faculty, as they’ve shown in the past that they are a gutter enterprise where free speech and open dialogue are concerned.
What difference does it make how he's received? I'm amazed that, with the visitation of a leader from a nation with which we are hearing the drumbeats of war from our own government, that people would be more concerned with how the students of the university choose to approach the matter of free speech.
…unless of course you wish to advocate for restrictions on free speech, but I cannot understand why anyone would willfully want to poison the well of discourse in this manner.
but speaking solely for myself, I care not a whit, what some overprivileged, overindulged, non taxpaying, non military or public service, adolescent either says or thinks.
<
p>
More egregiously, I find it repugnant that an alleged institution of learning, will allow a man who despises every ideal that CU allegedly espouses, to spout his vitriol, which is readily accessible anywhere electronically or in print. The president of CU stating that they would cordially extend the same invitation to Adolph Hitler is even more astonishing. Pray tell, what exchange of ideas could the CU student body exchange with Herr Hitler? Neville Chamberlain tried the kinder and gentler approach. Care to expound on what the Fuhrer may have been thinking when he was listening to and watching the Prime Minister wet his pants and wring his hands?
I would venture to guess that Hitler was ruminating whether to use xyklon B or cyanide gas. When one has a dagger at your heart, one does not engage in discorse.
<
p>
“I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I’ll kill you all” James M. Mattis, General, United States Marine Corps to shiite insurgent leaders at Fallujah, Iraq.
Besides the right wing extremist talk show hosts, what makes you think that Ahmadinejad presents anything close to the destructive potential that Hitler did? He's not even a dictator in Iran!
I'm not defending Ahmadinejad, but it's a bit embarrassing to see the right wing wetting their pants over this perceived Hitlerian “threat”
Are you asserting that the US is threatened by Iran like someone with a dagger at their heart?
How so, exactly?
Sharia.
<
p>
Do you deny that Iran doesn’t hang gays and the likeminded.
Do you think that for a moment that those who “offend” the muslim clerics are not dealt with immediately and harshly, as in being put to the sword?
<
p>
Paranoia? perhaps, but I am of the opinion that the world is now locked in an “us and them ” struggle. Which would you prefer?
…in Orwell's “1984”.
Is that the kind of society you prefer?
I think you have more to fear in your own mind than you do from Iran.
or the GLBT’s. “we don’t have homosexuals in Iran”. Of course they don’t. They hang them.
I know raj is in germany because he mentions it from time to time. I didn't know you were in Tel Aviv.
You don't have enough faith in your own Israeli government to keep you safe?
Do you even know the difference between Shiites and Sunnis?
I’ve read enough reviews of Huntington’s book to know I don’t need to read it, either.
<
p>
I reiterate my point: us vs them thinking doesn’t match the real world were Salafists think Shi’ites are heretics. It’s the same bozo thinking that would lump an essentially secular nationalist like Saddam Hussein with a deeply religious, transnationalist like bin Laden.
<
p>
It’s kind of like a scared child first going to kindergarten and noticing that everyone else is “other”, does not belong to his or her family.
If the Supreme Leader is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, then why is everyone dancing around Ahmadinejad? He isn’t even as high as a Vice President. More like a cabinet member.
<
p>
What’s missing here? Who gives a damn what Mr. Ahmadinejad says.