Uproars Entertainment

Is Ahmadinejad really having the last laugh over Ground Zero and speaking at Columbia?

By denying Ahmadinejad's request to visit Ground Zero as well as protesting his right to speak at Columbia University, aren't we giving ourselves a black eye? Yes, most everybody knows that he has a gift for saying the unthinkable through harsh rhetoric; however, by creating an uproar over his wanting to visit Ground Zero and his being able to speak at Columbia, aren't we, at least in a way, going against our own principles of freedom of speech and expression as well as the principle of diplomatic convention? Secondly, although his shock-rhetoric does annoy a lot of Americans and Westerners, by doing this to restrain his actions, aren't we, in the eyes of Islamic nations, helping to validate Ahmadinejad's views about the United States being a "closed" and anti-Muslim society?

Public Comments

1. I see where you are coming from, and I'm all for free speech, but don't we need to draw the line somewhere?
2. I completely agree and say as much in another post. Does America really want to show it has something to fear from this man?Indeed it might even learn something,now that would be a step forward.
3. No. That is like Hitler or Mousellini coming here to speak at a university, then visiting Pearl Harbor. They had nothing directly to do with the attacks, but they supported or were allied with Tojo. This has nothing to do with being anti-Muslim, this has to do with this moron, saying he wants to bring about the 12th imam, how the holocaust never happened and he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, and the fact that he is very anti-American. Like Arafat was not allowed in the US during the Reagan administration, this putz should not be allowed in the US during any administration.
4. We are not speaking of equality here. How do we look in they eyes of Islamic nations ? It is how do we look in the eyes of Ahminadajabad who is full of hatred for the Israelis and for Our President, and needs to express more of this hate at the 9/11 site or at the University? Ahmadinejad, when he is ready to express any peaceful solution, can be heard anywhere. We are praying for our President , that God Almighty guide him in all his decisions, and we pray for our enemies, as well, that there will be a harmonious and peaceful solution, to any differences. Only God can answer our prayers, and God always answers.
5. The biggest objection to Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia is the propaganda advantage it gives him back in the Middle East. For a long time now, he has been trying to position himself as the future organizer of the Muslim states. This definitely helps cement that goal. It will get all sorts of play in the Middle East media. On a similar note, letting someone who is an avowed enemy of America speak here makes us look WEAK in the Muslim mind...not stronger.
6. Very well said
7. For a long time, we had to take it how Islamic countries gather to protest against our leaders and even burning our flags. I think it's refreshing now how the shoe is on the other foot as we speak our voice about what we think of their leaders. At least we are not burning their flag.
8. yep -- and u better belive that they are watchin and laughin at home in beautiful (?) Iran
9. I completely agree with you. Ya know, If we want to have peace in the Middle East, humiliating their leaders and refusing to talk to them is a good first step. Dontcha think? That said, I don't think many Americans have read Voltaire, the author of the applicable statement: I disagree with your opinion, but I'll defend to the death your right to express it." I'm all for hating Ahmadinejad. He is about as well-liked in Iran as Bush is liked here. What I find ridiculous is the uproar and the active attempts of Americans to prevent him from speaking. If our leaders and our culture are so weak and frightened that we cannot allow a country's leader, any country's leader, to show respect and a willingness to discuss matters for fear it will damage or weaken us, we might as well give up now.
10. You may have a point. It's sort of lose lose. If we show our tolerance for others, ignorant Americans will be angry. If we don't let him speak, we are seen as a land who doesn't believe in freedom to those islamic entities. I think what happened was perfect. He was allowed to speak, but yet there was tons of protest about his arrival. So the message of tolerance and freedom gets sent with the message that we also disapprove of this guy and we won't hide how we feel about him. I think anytime we can open dialogue between supposed "enemies", it's a good thing. The Art of War says you must know your enemy for increased chance of success. It's beneficial to understanding them and arriving to peace. We'll have a more informed perspective about how to either defeat them in war or how to globally coexist. Remember two things: It is in our government's interest to portray someone as an enemy, and Evil is a matter of perspective. Beware of not only Ahmadinejad's propaganda, but propaganda at home, too. I don't think a speech at Ground Zero is necessary, but I wouldn't mind him going there -- otherwise he might say it didn't happen!! BTW, I thought he kinda looked ridiculous, everyone laughed at him and it looked like he didn't know why!
11. the main reason people bash this guy (or the way the media makes it seem) is because he said the holocaust doesnt exist and that isreal isnt a true country (thats actually true and history proves it, just like history proves that the holocaust did exist). but how is his opinion affecting anyone? unless you let it affect you. Secondly, people opposing his visit to the US and speaking at Columbia, stop going out of your way to oppose whats going to happen anyway, especially if he has every single right to speak there, because he was INVITED! Not because he stormed in. Your just making yourselves look like touchy @$ses. I agree with you that it definitely could just help him validate his points in the end....