Columbia University + Freedom of Speech

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Sep 21 2007, 08:00 AM) [snapback]515769[/snapback]</div>

I disagree. The value of the publicity to the Iranians is greater than any "heat" generated by questioning.

In the translation provided to his people and the Arab street, the Americans will come off as buffoons and the President of Iran as a grand defender of the Muslim faith.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(roryjr @ 2007 09 22 02:08) [snapback]516111[/snapback]</div>

Freedom of Speech is not an exclusively American concept.

 

It's an interesting dilemma. Do you give the guy enough rope to hang himself, or do you shoot first and ask questions later?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 22 2007, 10:16 AM) [snapback]516202[/snapback]</div>

Well, don't be surprised if in a few days after Ahmadinejad does his little stunt (especially if his responses appear to be more of scripted statements), there is a translation that is put up on all of the jihadi web sites. This ploy is nothing new... the Soviet Union used it in the 1960s and 1970s - they are basically playing to their base and those recruits that are leaning toward joining but need a little "push".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 22 2007, 10:16 AM) [snapback]516202[/snapback]</div>

The questions that he doesn't want to have published will not be published on the jihadi websites. Any attempt to provide an objective counterpoint will be dismissed as crusader propaganda.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 22 2007, 10:16 AM) [snapback]516202[/snapback]</div>

I am more concerned with giving him a forum to spout his invective or an opportunity to turn the forum to his propaganda objectives for his audience. If you think back a bit, Ahmadinejad was on the ropes politically. The Iranian economy was taking hits left right and center. Even his backers were distancing themselves from him. Then what happens? The brilliant minds that got us into the Iraq cesspool start rattling sabers. Guess what? Ahmadinejad gets a new lease on life. Giving him a forum to tweak the nose of the great satan is not the best use of resources.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Sep 22 2007, 01:08 PM) [snapback]516197[/snapback]</div>

Not my point. Freedom of speech was given as a reason why we could not refuse him. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the Constitution for it's citizens. He is not a citizen and therefore he is not entitled to freedom of speech here and has no protection against being denied free speech. I do know that it is not a concept practiced in his country.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(eagle33199 @ Sep 21 2007, 10:22 AM) [snapback]515858[/snapback]</div>

Wow, I agreed with you on something.

Preventing one side from expressing a point of view is never a good thing when conflict is invloved. But hey, why should we listen to the other side when our war machine is ready for action. Kill em all and let god sort em out right? *shakes head*

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 22 2007, 10:16 AM) [snapback]516202[/snapback]</div>

You are giving too much credit where credit it not due. <_<

You know very well that all Ahmadinejad needs to do is wave is finger at the crowd, say, "Bush is a bad man, a very bad man" . . . and as a result, half of the liberals in the audience and here on PriusChat will be nodding their heads in agreement with any thing else he has to say for the rest of the night.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 23 2007, 09:26 PM) [snapback]516742[/snapback]</div>

The truth is the truth regardless of who speaks it... Bush is a bad man, a very bad man. Or a complete buffoon. Hahaha

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Sep 23 2007, 09:49 PM) [snapback]516748[/snapback]</div>

Or, completely delusional....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Sep 23 2007, 09:49 PM) [snapback]516748[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(apriusfan @ Sep 23 2007, 10:02 PM) [snapback]516755[/snapback]</div>

Point being that all Ahmadinejad needs to do is utter those words and half of the liberals will be in a catatonic trance and nodding their heads in agreement for the rest of the night.

Thank you for so diligently demonstrating the Pavlovian response those words induce in many of you liberals.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 23 2007, 10:20 PM) [snapback]516763[/snapback]</div>

Wonder who is Pavlovian? Is the pot calling the kettle black?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 24 2007, 03:47 AM) [snapback]516799[/snapback]</div>

More like a dirty bomb - the science of building high-yield lightweight devices is nontrivial. Notice the effort that Iran is making toward acquiring a seat at the nuclear club - a uranium based bomb. The uranium bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima was not even tested before being dropped (and the total weight was somewhere around 8,000 lbs.). With enough centrifuges and time, you can get to the requisite critical mass of U-235. 8,000 lbs of casing, control circuitry and fusing explosives later, you have a functional device.

However, you have a valid point about being able to threaten countries with even a dirty bomb. Which is why all of the uproar over the theater-specific anti-missile system that is under construction in Poland and the Czech Republic. But even without an anti-missile system, to credibly threaten people with nukes requires more than one device. Look at the recent "incident" in Syria (where Israel conducted air strikes that reached out and touched a secret Syrian facility). If Iran were to credibly join the nuclear club, there would be action taken against it one way or the other. Me thinks Syria was made an example of to give a wake-up call to the mullahs in case they got carried away drinking their own Kool-Aid....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 24 2007, 04:56 AM) [snapback]516814[/snapback]</div>

They may not have to build a delivery system - they could buy it from North Korea.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Sep 21 2007, 11:39 AM) [snapback]515802[/snapback]</div>

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/rotc/

Cough.

So they have to travel to other schools within the Bronx to take their courses.. it certainly seems like they can officially enroll with Columbia's sanction.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(roryjr @ Sep 22 2007, 09:08 AM) [snapback]516111[/snapback]</div>

Really! The American constitution says freedom of speech is for American citizens only? I don't believe that. If so then it is an oxymoron. I believe fundamentally, in a country, whatever rules govern what someone has the right to say should be the same regardless of their nationality, creed, colour, religion, race, sex, age etc..

Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights: ' Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through the media and regardless of frontiers.'