Then they call conservatives nazis.....lol.....

First a terrorist is welcome then he would like to invite Hitler to speak to his fellow liberal kids......

Then they wonder why they are called fascist and terrorist supporters.

We (the U.S.) talked to Nikita Khrushchev, someone far more dangerous and aggressive than this bafoon.

Regardless of the vile and hatred he will spew, I am interested to see what he has to say when questioned by Americans at a University. How very unexpected.

The thing is, even being crazy and evil, Americans are playing into his hands when they protest his visiting ground zero, which apparently isn't what he actually wanted. What he wanted was the hostility from us to protest his visit so that he can call us the evil ones when he goes home. Either way all of this hostility isn't good.

And this is what I can't stand.

I'm watching FOXnews and they talk to students who are all speaking rather respectfully about Akmanajhad, saying his speech was kinda long, drawn out, but they gave him credit for several points he made.

And what does that greasy haired, d-bag Shepard Smith say? He's too busy calling him a "terrorist" and asking whether this forum will give too much legitimacy to Akmanajhad and his "crimes", possibly backfiring on Columbia.

THEY DON'T EVEN CARE WHAT HE HAS TO SAY!!!!!

I can't stand it. They showed 3 seconds of his reply to Bollinger, a reply that I thought was wholly reasonable. Akmanajhad made the point that it is irresponcible and rude to be brought to a forum to speak... and before he gets a word out, he is verbally assaulted.

Again, I'm not saying this guy is even that great of a human being... but at least let him speak.

It's absurd. It's illogical. It's terryfing.

FOXnews just basically said that talking to people is bad.

Why am I always surprised by this behavior?

The neocon FOX in the henhouse!

OswaldTheOsprey

I watch it because I don't want to watch news that "pets my ego".


It doesn't matter what I think he's gonna say... only what he ACTUALLY says. Everything else is irrelevent and presumptuous.

I can't even watch the whole discussion because FOXnews is too busy giving me shit. I caught part of an interview on 60 Minutes and I have to say, Akmanajhad surprised me. He didn't strike with a theological hammer and he didn't go off topic. He did an interview. I watched it. I now know what he says. My job as a partially educated human being is to watch what he does.

He's developing a nuclear program and so far, despite the world's assumption that he is making weapons, shows no military goal or movement. No one has offered proof that he wants a nuclear weapon or that he is ratchting up for war with ANY of his neighbors.

On the contrary, he's cooperating with the IAEA and questioning the US's military build up on his front stoop - a reasonable responce.


So offering a platform to a speaker, regardless of popular opinion, is wrong?

Bush shouldn't be allowed to speak anywhere then.

I can't believe you, of all people, a sensible and reasonable person, would deny a person the right to speak SIMPLY because you and a majority of other people disagree with him. I disagree with him too, but it's the job of Democracy itself, not the US, to offer a podium to those who wish to speak.

If the US government refuses to talk to people is it irresponcible for other social communities inside it to let them?

I think Oswald hit it pretty close.  Ahmadenijad gets to speak, but the Minutemen are disinvited?  I have never heard anything out of the Minutemen that is as appalling as what the Iranian President says.  Part of the reason people are angry over this is that this guy is far less helpful to America than the Minutemen, and yet here he is.

His rhetoric is not in line with anything that could be considered peaceful or progressive.  But lets be honest, he is FAR from the worst person we could have speaking at an American university.  He is not a war criminal nor has he overseen any type of genocide.  Don't get me wrong, I don't like the guy, but there are a lot of people that would have been worse than him.  Also, as nasty as this character may be, he isn't really in control in Iran.  He doesn't call the shots.  He is a mouth - and that is about it.

But, I have to applaud Columbia's President for giving no quarter.  He didn't beat around the bush and stroke the ego of this guy.  He didn't come out and say, "Mr. President, we are so happy you are here.  Please tell us why America is so bad.  You are a great light of hope in the world - a true revolutionary.  Blah blah, blah blah."  He told him how people view him and gave him fair warning that this crowd is far less gullible than the fanatics he preaches to in Iran.

My personal feeling is that he is a world leader, and should be given the chance to speak.  With that said, I also believe that he should have to take his lashes from the audience and the hosts.  The man needs to understand that he is not going to go unchallenged here.

Indeed, this is how America shines.  Letting the man speak shows that we are a country that takes free speech very seriously.  We knew he would ridicule the US, and yet he was free to say what he wanted.  His views are not popular, and he was rightfully scorned for them.  He wasn't silenced however, and that is what sets us apart.

Today, America was the bigger man.