Wednesday, September 26, 2007

612- WHATS WITH THIS

WHY IS THIS GUY HERE AND WHAT THE HELL IS HE TRYING TO DO
Get this asshole outta here, why is he talking at Colombia U., what are they thinking? This is a friggin' disgrace to allow him a public venue to spew his shit on our soil. This guy is the enemy!!!
He is responsible for deaths of American soldiers, and they give him a stage. Preposterous to say the least, I think he needs an Iranian IED up his skinny ass.
The News...Ahmadinejad Blasts Israel, Denies Existence of Iranian Gays During Columbia Speech Monday, September 24, 2007... Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday questioned why Iran can't have a nuclear program when the United States has one, repeated his inference that historical accounts of the Holocaust are myths, and denied that there are homosexuals in Iran... Fox News Here
Read the whole story and decide if you understand why he was here. What an idiot. I can't keep on with this, I'll get too potty mouthed and pissed. So that's all.
.....GED.....

6 comments:

Pragmatic Plato said...

I understand all the hostility some people may feel against have him speak at an American University. I however do not feel the same way.

This takes my tiff with Mr. Turbitt up many many notches but fundamentally it stems from the same root.

Is it wrong to conduct a debate with anyone? Is it wrong to stifle anyone' speech in an effort to protect the ears their words may fall upon? Protect them from what? arriving at their own opinion? Do we lack that much confidence in the masses and if so who are we to take on the role of the ultimate protector? Who is the moral authority as to who should be allowed voice and who shouldn't? Where are the lines to be drawn?

Giving him and ear, I believe, in no way automatically grants legitimacy to his words. I would like to think that people can have dialogue and discourse and come to their own conclusions on whether to believe or take to heart the words of another.

I pulled this quote from a blog with someones reason on why he should not have been allowed to speak:

"There is obviously something, though, which smacks of a canine appetite for intercourse with the headlines in inviting a figure as lurid as Ahmadinejad, associated with the most fatal kind of international relations, head of an extraordinarily barbarous and repressive regime, who is such an avowed enemy of the United States."

I would assume that in some countries their populace would feel the same way about having Bush speak at one of their academies. And it would not be hard to put the same kind of label on some of the acts that we have backed and condoned.

I know my words will strike a cord with many and I am prepared for the heat so long as conversation is allowed to continue and an exchange of views is allowed to flourish. I do not have all the answers and I am far from all knowing. I am interested in hearing what others think and feel in regards to this.This is a very hot subject (nearly 451 degrees fahrenheit).

It is late and I will revisit this tomorrow. Undoubtedly there will be much written to address. This is a good thing.

Please do not take this as an attack on you personally. Just a way to start open dialogue on this very important subject. I not am playing devil's advocate. I am not after "getting a rise" out of anything other than communication.

glend558 said...

Americans fought and died for the freedom of speech...FOR AMERICANS!
NOT IRANIANS! Do you think you can go say your piece on a stage in Iran? When you think you can, you go do it, I'm sure they want to hear what you have to say. Then we'll all be equal, and your ass will be stoned, (no not that way.) As you see, you are an infidial, and must die. It's the only way they think.. Go ahead start a debate, until the rocks start flying then you'll see the value of your dialogue and discussions. When that first friggin rock hits your learned head all will be over your case will be closed, all will be for naught. Then we'll all live happily ever after. I'll be right, you'll be dead, simple..Go..Go..Go..

SteeleOnSaipan said...

Great answer Glen. Regardless of the subject and position, I can't and won't respect an opinion from anyone who's too chicken-shit to show who they are when they spew that opinion. Even the Iranian president had enough balls to not hide behind a goofy Plato mask.

lil_hammerhead said...

I didn't see any prestige in Amahdinejad's appearance at Columbia Univeristy. In fact, he looked like a buffoon. A free and free thinking people need not worry about a speech by a dictator. While Amahdinejad said nothing new during the appearance, I believe he provided quite an education to those students who were there. There's something about a first-hand experience with someone that affects you in a way that television can't. Judging by the conversation with students who were present at the appearance, Amahdinejad gained no fans and, in fact, lessened whatever credibility he may have had. His appearance got much more coverage than his other appearances usually get, because he was in the US. As such, a great many more Americans were exposed to his ridiculous, outrageous and in some cases downright stupid insights.

bigsoxfan said...

I'm with the IED option, we've messed around with the whole sorry bunch for way too long. Of course, it isn't the American way to slay innocents directly and it is hard to justify collateral damage when we turn the country into a parking lot. Sigh.. Can't we be truly bad just this once.

glend558 said...

I can listen to Castro, Hugo Chevez, Kim Jong Ill, even our own far left but they are not directly involved in KILLING AMERICANS!! This is where I draw the line on dialogue. Talking is one thing murder is another. The above are all idiots in my book and I understand everyones reasoning, but in this case NOT! But with I'manutjob* we looked stupid too. I'll bet he was laughing all the way home. "Imagine I'm killing those bastards and I even get to talk on their stage. Stupid Americans." Now I'm getting pissed!! Thats all.
* I'm a nut job