Rabbosai, I am taking the liberty of posting this here for the benefit of residents in the New York area who may cruise into this blog over the weekend. I am doing so because Jameel has more readers than I do, and reaches a wider, more connected audience.
[Some of you may have reservations about Stand With Us. If so, I urge you to put them aside for the time being. But I would be keen to hear your feedback or ideas, so please feel free to contact me at my own blog: http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/ ----- B.O.T.H.]
RALLY IN NEW YORK AGAINST AHMEDINEJAD
[This Monday, September 24]
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's will visit to the US this coming Monday, September 24. It is shocking to think that he will not only be addressing the United Nations in New York but he will also be speaking at Columbia University, spewing his hatred of America, Israel and Jews.
Since he will be allowed to make his voice heard, our voices must be louder.
RALLY RALLY RALLY
Multiple organizations are mobilizing two different rallies to challenge this insanity. One at Columbia University: W 116th street and Broadway (across from Lerner Hall) Monday, September 24th 1 - 3 p.m. Busses will be coming from Brooklyn College, Queens College, Rutgers University and more.
The Second Rally will take place at NOON at 2nd Ave. and 47th street, Subways 4, 5, 6 or 7 to grand central station... TWELVE NOON-- rain or shine.
IMPORTANT:
We are aware that the Columbia event MAY GET CANCELED but as of now, Friday afternoon in New York, it is still scheduled to happen. STAY TUNED to the home page at http://www.standwithus.com/, and we will give you an update if it is canceled. AND...IF IT GETS CANCELED we need you to go to the United Nations location for the rally organized by the Conference of Presidents and supported by multiple organizations including StandWithUs... and will be held at 2nd Ave. and 47th street, Subways 4, 5, 6 or 7 to grand central station... TWELVE NOON-- rain or shine.
BUSSING:
Busses will leave Rutgers at 11:00 Busses will leave Queens and Brooklyn Colleges 11:30 Exact pick up points to be announced on Sunday, check back with StandWithUs.com home page for updates before Monday.
Bring friends... this is a time to stand up together and condemn the face of evil, and any platform that would allow evil to promote itself.
email: info@standwithus.com
phone: 310-836-6140
web: http://www.standwithuscampus.com/
-------------------------------------------------------
Regards, gmar chasimah tovah to all, and may you have an easy and meaningful fast.
------B.O.T.H.
http://atthebackofthehill.blogspot.com/
Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael
Here is the phone number to comment on the decision to allow Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University:
ReplyDelete1-212-854-9970
And the email address for comments regarding the decision.
dpb21@columbia.edu
it is much more important to attend the columbia rally.
ReplyDeletehis presence at the UN is normal. he is just a mamzer at a kinus mamzerim.
the invite to columbia is very different and gives him a sense of legitimacy.
see http://agmk.blogspot.com/2007/09/ahmaeichmanejad-at-columbia-redux-part.html#links
It's very interesting that the first sign of a totalitarian regime is one that will suppress the freedom of others to speak. It seems as if that position, one practiced by the current Iranian government is what is being advocated for in this space.
ReplyDeleteAs Justice Brandeis famously said, the cure for bad speech is more speech. Engaging the speaker in a debate that will demonstrate that his policies and opinions are wrong and (in this case) evil.
The president of Columbia hit it right on the nose when he attached the condition that if Ahmadinejad is to speak on his campus, he will have to respond to some very difficult questions coming from very acute people.
This is the way democracy demonstrates its superiority.
JERRY:
ReplyDelete1. He can speak all he wants on the corner of Broadway and 116th, but the First Amendment does not obligate Columbia to provide him with a forum on the campus itself. This whole episode has nothing to do with the onset of a "totalitarian regime," as no local, state or federal government is involved in this episode.
2. Recognize that he is using you and abusing the great principle you stand for. Do you know what it looks like back home and throughout the Third World for him to be honored in such a fashion by one of the premier institutions of American academe? This invitation will only improve his popularity ratings and serve to delegitimize his domestic opposition. It will also whitewash his image for many Americans.
3. Can’t you understand that he is an enemy of the U.S. who wants to destroy it and the First Amendment? (And he is not just a possible future enemy; Iran has been and continues to be actively involved in causing the deaths of US soldiers.)
4. Do you think Ahmaeichmanejad will reciprocate and invite Bollinger to speak his mind at an Iranian madrasa?
5. Did you speak up when a Minutemen program at Columbia was violently interrupted by students, or when Bollinger refused to grant access to the ROTC on campus. (Oh yeah, he only defends the free speech of those who want to destroy the U.S., not those who sacrifice their lives to protect it.)
6. Did you know that Columbia is barring non-student protesters from the campus when Ahmaeichmanejad speaks. Apparently Bollinger's doctrinaire commitment to free speech is not as absolute as his apologists would like to think.
"The president of Columbia hit it right on the nose when he attached the condition that if Ahmadinejad is to speak on his campus, he will have to respond to some very difficult questions coming from very acute people."
do you think this is the first time that Ahmadinejad has been pressed with "very difficult questions coming from very acute people"? you think bollinger is going to be the one break to him and make him publicly repent?
"This is the way democracy demonstrates its superiority."
no. this is the way an enemy of democracy uses the shield of its principles to bring it down.
MKE-
ReplyDelete1. As a university, Columbia sees itself as a fountain of ideas. Through argument and debate, we can sift through those ideas and determine which are true and worthy. That cannot happen by banning some ideas from presenting themselves. This is what they'd do in a university run by the Iranian government. The fact is, that Columbia is interested in the truth, and while they too believe Ahmadinejad is despicable, the best way for that truth to come out is by engaging him in a serious discussion regarding his values.
2. As for honoring him- if he is vilified while at Columbia, as a free debate should accomplish, then he will certainly not be viewed in a positive light simply because he was given the "honor" of speaking there.
3. I absolutely understand that he is an enemy to the US and all of its freedoms. I believe that this is something that is appropriate to be demonstrated at Columbia University.
4. Of course Ahmadinejad won't invite Bollinger or an other Western speaker to preach his values in Iran. That's the point. They are an oppresive, totalitarian regime, and the US is a benevolent democracy. That doesn't mean that she'll allow herself to be destroyed, but she will uphold one of her central values.
5&6. I don't know what these issues are. I made a comment on a blog. If the blog had reported about these issues, and I disagreed with its stance regarding them, I would have commented there too. If in fact Bollinger is suppressing free speech himself, then that is definitely wrong, although I would tend to believe that it's more of a security issue than anything else.
The issue is not to make Ahmadinejad break and publicly repent. It is simply to present all the viewpoints in order to allow the world to determine where the truth lies. Think about our little debate right here- you're not going to ban me from the site because I disagree with you, are you? No, you're going to respond to my points with your own opinions, and allow anyone who might be reading this to form their own conclusions as to who's right. That's how free speech contributes to a thriving democratic society.
If you think that a speech by Ahmadinejad is going to "bring down" the great United States democracy, then I think you are the one who gives too much credence to the evil man's ideas. I, on the other hand, know that they consist of bunk, and am therefore not afraid or intimidated to let them be heard.
JERRY:
ReplyDelete"If in fact Bollinger is suppressing free speech himself, then that is definitely wrong, although I would tend to believe that it's more of a security issue than anything else"
what is the security issue with allowing ROTC activity on campus, especially when the student body favors it by a margin of 2:1? bollinger and the columbia administration/faculty have a leftist agenda. plain and simple and they are only committed to free speech when it suites their agenda.
"Think about our little debate right here- you're not going to ban me from the site because I disagree with you, are you?"
you are a reasonable person. you have not helped kill my compatriots in iraq and my coreligionists in israel, nor do you hope to destroy america
"Columbia is interested in the truth, and while they too believe Ahmadinejad is despicable, the best way for that truth to come out is by engaging him in a serious discussion regarding his values."
now that all has been said and heard . . . honestly, what have you learned about ahme from this wonderful exchange of ideas, views, opinions, etc. that you didn't already know before? what was the point of all this again?
mke-
ReplyDeleteYou seem to think that the only benefit of having Ahmadinejad speak is to have him renege on all of his opinions and admit that he's wrong.
that's not happening.
however, look at what did happen. he made a complete fool of himself. he had people in the audience (and around the world) laughing at his ridiculous assertions.
it was very clear who was right and who was wrong.
JERRY:
ReplyDelete"You seem to think that the only benefit of having Ahmadinejad speak is to have him renege on all of his opinions and admit that he's wrong."
no. i didn't think there was any benefit in having him speak.
"it was very clear who was right and who was wrong."
it seems to me that this were already obvious. i just don't see how the address shed any new light on him.