Let Ahmadinejad speak

he will be remembered for his statement on homosexuals, and there goes his credibility.

Listen to the brave "guy" maybe you learn something... think about it.

How exactly is Aj worse than Cheney & Bush? The latter are probably 10x worse than he is. I agree he might be on par with the Zionist regime but c'mon don't compare him with US Blackwater - Iraq baby killers,..

Real Americans (unlike you dual-loyalty types) enjoy the benefits of homosexual marriage. My partner, Bob, and I, are as committed to each other as any heterosexual couple, and we tied the knot just recently. He is a real man.

"Okay what is the point of all these posts. You go on as if Israel is just milking America dry and is not a very good ally anyway." You are correct. Israel is a useless ally, a moral embarrasment and a libility.

The issue of the liberty. You are wrong as usual; it has not been thru the American court system. The decision to declare it was an accident was political and not based on fact. Peter the simple minded: Reading your post one would conclude that the Arabs have done nothing wrong over the last century ? ANY I haven?t said anything about Arabs. Your assumptions are idiotic andf you have no reason for lying about what I have said. PSM Israel no longer receives non military aid the. Not true. It Is disguised as military aid, of which 25 % can be used to ourchase ot use in anyway to develop its arms industry. THAT IS ECONOMIC AID! I have heard of CAIR. Have you heard of AIPAC? Have you heard of Pollard?

Have you ever heard the phrase, "whistling past the graveyard"? It would serve nicely for a topic head on this article. This Iranian guy wiped the floor with the Pres. of Columbia, sent the NY publicity crowd into hysterics, took down Charley Rose in high style, and walked away without a mark on him. The performance at the UN was the capper with the Iranian dictating that it was all over as to the fuel issue, and the rest was normal UN regulation, yes UN regulation. Can they get away with this? Well I guess you have to stay tuned, but it sure sounds like it. Bush spoke at the UN and walked away spurned and defeated in terms of rhetorical performance. This guy aced it. For several days the US media stumbled around not sure how to handle the story of the Iranian triumph. The US media establishment will never again just buy Israeli hysteria. But what was the line. As of Sunday they are getting it together on the basis that it is not yet over (a pallid statement by a White House aide

Hey NY I don't kow when you were in the navy, but we don't use sails anymore. (high-hat!) Okay what is the point of all these posts. You go on as if Israel is just milking America dry and is not a very good ally anyway. Disagreement? the sleeziest insinuation of yours is that America is sacrificing its young on the altar of serving Israel. I was surprised you did not use the term "chosen people" good self control buddy. We do not hand out candies when Americans are killed. We help to transport your wounded to our hospitals. We serve as a high tech training base, and we happen to be on the front line with your greatest enemy, which is not Bush or Israel, but those who celebrate "Death to America Day" and danced on 9/11. I understand your psychological need for a scapegoat, but we ar not it, and your criticsms border on something far more disturbing then wondering if Israel is a good ally or not. We also got girls & beer in Haifa, no morality squads. Cheers!

The idea of "cobelligerent" comes straight out of walt mersheimer.

Arab racism is behind that war. You do not speak for your fellow Americans when you say American principles would allow the USA to sit back and allow the Arabs to do what they openly proclaim. Using emotive language does not change what the Arabs have done or still try to do. What do you call a Qassem on a kindergarten or the massacre at Munich? Reading your post one would conclude that the Arabs have done nothing wrong over the last century. Israel no longer receives non military aid the Arabs do and lots of it.However the Israeli economy continues to improve. Talking about the Liberty,that has been through the American court system why don't you quote its findings instead of your "interpretation". Ever heard of CAIR? Seems like you have not.

The Palestinians have recieved billions amongst many other Moslem countries. Who do you think feeds the refugees from Arab genocide in the Sudan?

Your argumrnt is so brilliant ( STUPID) I dont understand it. Israel is not part of the United States. It fights its own battles. It has never asked for our military blood. Cant say this about some of the Muslim nations. Ihave every right as an American citizen to express my disguest about Ahmadinejad speaking at university. His country is supplying weapons to kill and wound our children.

(Fox) Ask the American navy which has made Haifa there center in the Meditteranean Answer Bull Shit! Haifa is not am American naval facility. I have some experience with our navy, the fleet once put in there for shore leave when I was there. It has put in there other times as well. It was also in Alexandria Egypt, when I was there. Such ports of call are almost always determined politically. Our fleet facilities are not in Israel. (Fox) $13.1 million in military aid. Oooooo that must have broken the budget. My answer was in response to your bull shit claim that Israel received no aid that year. Had you not exaggerated (can we call it a lie?), I would not have said a thing. I get the impression that you will falsify facts if it suits your purpose, or if it suits your argument you will fabricate history. I made no claim as to the significance or value of American welfare as it was to Israel. That you view America?s charity as inadequate to what you feel that you are entitled to, or that you display ingratitude for our charity confirms that the relationship is one sided. I didn?t see any hierocracy such as this in Egypt.

It looks like Ahmadinejad made his decision about the future and is dictating his vision. There are no Gays in Iran, and the women are feeling free without any individual freedom. So Jews don’t have to defend themselves in front of the maniac. But other Muslims really have to be afraid of the damage this man does in words and deeds.

Nothing is as crystal clear as it is now, what do you think now on this visit? Do you still think he should havd had a chance to talk?

Peter the SM, You forget Americans have died defending Moslems You misstate the issue. However, don?t forget the American sailors that died when the Jews murdered them on the U.S.S. Liberty or the Jewish American patriots such as Pollard and Franklin and patriotic Jewish organizations such as AIPAC. I do not see any significant difference as to the moral position of either side, or the interest of America in assisting one religious group prevailing over the other. Why should we care?

The difference is obvious: the frightened Concordia Bureaucracy followed moron’s ideology of the ostriches. They were afraid the riots and violence from the Muslim students. And they blocked the voices of the leaders of the democratic country. Colombia University ignored the voices of the protesters and gave the podium to the schizophrenic whose pathological hatred of Israel doesn’t look funny and can not been ignored by any meanings. If somebody looked stupid in this day- it was the director of the University. No matter what did he say to Ahmadinejad the Arab media will show only their brave hero slamming America and Israel in their own freedom built Alma Matter.

Peter SM ( the Simple Minded) (Simple mind), Arabs killed Americans for many reasons~ And will continue to do so. Blaming or in your case the innuendo that the hatred toward the USA and the West and Islamic terror begins and ends with Israel is your biggotry but not reality. I didn?t suggest or say the above. That we have created more enemies and hatred as a result of our support for Israeli expansion and atrocities against a people, the Palestinians, that did nothing to justify our alliance against them, or our support in their slaughter, which is counter to every American principle and value that we have. That we will have differences with Muslim countries is a given. But to add them because of Israel?s racist conduct is a shameful act by America. (SM) Are you implying that 12 million dollars in USA military aid had any significant effect on the outcome of the war? Did I? However, are you implying that Israel would not be a third world nation without the 135 Billion in aid thru 1997. In addition to 10 billion since then?

hey NY, $13.1 million in military aid. Oooooo that must have broken the budget. they gave more to Angola that year. As for your second attempt at a point, " Americans have been killed over the years because of America association with Israel. The Arabs have viewed us as cobelligerents". Yha how many, and where exactly. Lebanon? were the Marines killed because of Israel, or because they were in Lebanon? who started their own little dirty civil war with the help of the PLO. but you do not want to hear such things. As for Israel not being a friend of the US, can I get some of what you are on? Ask the American navy which has made Haifa there center in the Meditteranean. Israel, where the embassy has never been torched, nor Americans killed or maimed for being Americans. I understand that the truth does not jibe with your need for a scapegoat. I understand that there are New Yorkers who reacted to 9/11 by blaming it on Bush, or Israel. You is saaaaaad.

As you always do - bringing up bogus claims of American assistance to Arabic countries to counter the huge amounts in aid - both open and not open - to Israel, is bogus. When you count Egypt, for example, don't forget that part of the aid they receive is "hush" money - amounts paid to buy the acquiescence and agreement to peace with Israel. Even now, that money is used to bribe the Egyptians to uphold the lock-down on Gaza, and to assist in the boycott of the palestinians' legitimate government. But with israel, interestingly - the "AIDS" moneys are used somehow by Israel to blackmail the US, which it is doing, day and night, on every front. The most recent being the campaign against Iran, which feeds ONLY Israel's paranoia. How this reverse blackmail works is truly an astounding phenomenon, but one that has parallels in the consumer's world. The imbalance of relative amounts of funding are astounding if you take everything into account. Hint: Israel received over $50 B and counting

How did that help? Almost all terror attacks worldwide are by Moslems. There is a clash between Islam and the World and it is not going to be apologised away by Israel bashers.

Corrupt at every level,mainting their hold by terrorising their citizens Their only hope is to create outside enemies.The last refuge of all scoundrels. The Israel Palestinian conflict has and had nothing to do with them. The Mullah dictatorship chose to get involved,let them wear the consequences.

He is not talking about any peaceful transition and is responsible for his actions.

And will continue to do so. Blaming or in your case the innuendo that the hatred toward the USA and the West and Islamic terror begins and ends with Israel is your biggotry but not reality. Are you implying that 12 million dollars in USA military aid had any significant effect on the outcome of the war? Have you listed how much the Arabs got in that time? Since? Do you have any problems there?

(FOX), America did not supply Israel with soldiers nor weaponry, the weaponry used in the six day war, were from the Brits, the French and the German. 1. In 1967 Israel received 13.1 million dollarsin Military aid. 2. Americans have been killed over the years because of America association with Israel. The Arabs have viewed us as cobelligerents. (FOX) With the increasing cold war, and the open Russian support of Syria and Egypt, America saw it in there self-interest to support the strongest, most loyal and democratic state in the region. America supported Israel as a counter weight to Russian support for Egypt and Syria. That was how geopolitics were played at that time. American self-interest. Israel was not then, and is not now a friend of America, and as a democracy, it is one that is not even on a level with the democracy they have in Turkey. anymore questions sir

"Jews don`t want to allow Ahmadinejad the opportunity to debate with others what he has been preaching because they are paranoid." Jews aren't a ballet troupe Walid. We don't all kick out at the same time in response to the same music. And we aren't all paranoid. I'm sure that there are as many paranoid Arabs (for instance) in the world as there are paranoid Jews. Among those paranoid Arabs there might be some who attribute your motives to Jews.

I was in South Africa in the 1970s and I am in Israel now and I can tell you that the people who worked for the freedom of the black people in South Africa were the same Jews who look for justice and freedom in Israel. Your assumption is that the SAfrican blacks and the Palestinians are the same people or that the same conditions apply. You are wrong. The blacks were innocent of crime and the system perpetrated against them was hideously unfair. The Afrikaners had no reason to behave as they did beyond selfishness and greed. The Jews in Israel are protecting themselves and their people. They are also working for the good of the Palestinians: note all the Jewish associations like Shalom Ahshav and B'tselem, and Machsom Watch. Where are the Palestinian Associations for the rights of the Jews?

sorry buddy, I do not agree that the world hates you for your support of Israel. Nor do they hate you for your support of Taiwan, South Korea, Australia or Canada. I personally have not found atleast with my Arab friends in Israel that they hate you at all. Actually they dream of spending time, learning or working in Ameerikah, as they call it. The greatest opposition in the Arab world to America is amoungst the educated classes, many having gone to the American U. in Beirut. Here they learn a strange and peculiar mutation of Arab nationalism and leftist rhetorical thought. When I travelled in Europe in '75, I wore a Canadian flag on my pack. Anti-American sentiments were rather high, short memories of dead Yanks littering Europe. America was hated then for Viet Nam, and by whom? Did these people pay any attention to Viet Nam after you left. did they care about the boat people that the US took in, did they march against the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia? NO!

Columbia has a World Leaders Forum to which it invites leaders of various countries to speak, regardless of their views. I was not present at this event, but people I know who watched it on their PC's, and all accounts I've heard, indicate that Ahmadinejab came off sounding like a lunatic, at least to an American audience (which is what was there). And almost everyone agrees that Columbia President Bollinger spoke very well in denouncing, to his face, the vile views of this man. I think Columbia, as an academic institution, felt it had a duty to its faculty and students to let this man present his views, uncensored, to an audience of its students, faculty and alumni. Personally, I felt proud of Columbia and proud of my city for allowing this to happen, and proud, also, of the almost universal reaction to his comments; he fooled no one.

Everyone, as a human being, has an opinion to make. By saying this, I do NOT defend president Ahmadinejad, even if he has the right to make his own opinion. For my own opinion, I find him very ironic and hypocrit : first, if Palestinians are "sufering" by Israeli occupation, is more because of the blindness and indifference by the Arab Community herself (they are not interested to creat a Palestinian country, but to converted in one of their own provinces)... second, if there are no homosexuals in Iran, is because they have all being killed by a represive and ultraconservative law system (on which, nobody is free to choose his/her sexuality ; actualy, is rare in this world that someone can choose his/her own life). Voilà, i made my opinion as human being. You're free to share it or hate me. I'm just a poor soul whose intentions are good, oh Lord don't let me be misunderstood

I do recall often the middle eastern part of the planet's hatred for us having to do with our funding of Israel's Military. Our money pays for your weapons, our political power protects you from the international community. Our undying support for "greater israel" policies gives rabid terrorists even more reason to hate us. America does a lot for israel and gets little in return. Let ahmanijad speak his crazy talk makes people rally to the side of Israel, because surely if Ahmanijad is the spokesman for the Palestinian side, they must all be terrorists. Why are americans focusing more on the fact that he questioned the holocaust? Isnt it more important that he's responsible for the death of our soldiers?

American, it that is what you are, the subject of my reponse to reader, was based on his statements that American soldiers were dying for the jewish state. It is a fact that no American soldier has died defending Israel. Like I said previous to the 67 war America did not supply Israel with soldiers nor weaponry, the weaponry used in the six day war, were from the Brits, the French and the Germans. From 1949-67 US aid to Israel averaged $63 million per year, 95% was economic devbleopment assistance and food aid. As I wrote, America previous to 67 was not a major backer of Israel. With the increasing cold war, and the open Russian support of Syria and Egypt, America saw it in there self-interest to support the strongest, most loyal and democratic state in the region. anymore questions sir?

If you read his speeches you will see that they are HIS analogies. FOX: "the Soviet Union imploded. There was no foreign attack with nuclear missles that left pop concentrations pulverized." That was exactly his point!!!! His point is that everyone thinks that zionism is invincible - here to stay - and he explained that everyone thought exactly the same about the Soviets, yet they suddenly imploded because of their own internal contradictions. FOX: "As for Iran, I suspect that you do not have a clue re: the Iranian rev. Early stages, was led by the Left, mujahadeen and students" Immaterial; the POINT being made was that the Shah's opponents dispaired of ever seeing the back of him, and then when push came to shove his regime collapsed like a house of cards. FOX: "Israel is not imploding" The Soviets thought the same. As did the Shah. They were wrong. Ahmadinejad is telling you that you are too. FOX: "Wake up sir, don`t play dumb." Back atcha' FOXie

"His remarks have been such that it was no problem for Dan Gillerman, Israel's UN ambassador, to suggest in an address to the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organization, that a Ahmadinejad visit Ground Zero was comparable to a visit by a resurrected Hitler to Auschwitz." It's comments like this that have enabled the Bush and Israeli regimes to act as ruthlessly as they have for so long. Ahmedinejad does 'exhibit the signs of a petty and cruel dictator'( as CU's Lee Bollinger chirped in such grandstanding fashion to deflect alumni wrath) but was only a mayor on 9/11/01. In respect to their status as American targets, like Saddam before him-Ahmedinejad had nothing to do with the attacks. To cling to the notion that either of them did is laughably gilded. In contrast, Auschwitz actually bore Hitler's personal terrible fingerprint.

(Fox) 1967, once again Israel was not supplied by the Yanks Wrong see http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html Also, this table does not include all amounts received by Israel.

Nice try, good opening. I see no way in which this benefits Israel, do you? As for Americans dying for Israel, when? Iraq? Sorry my friend but America is fighting for their own self-interests there, if they seem to fit Israel's then fine. they also happen to be in Saudi Arabia's best interests as would an attack on Iran. do not let your ignorance and myopism weigh your posts. As for Israel's wars, 1948 America did not offer any other support than in the UN, but The Soviets also voted for a Jewish state. 1956, Israel's allies were Britain and France, not the States. 1967, once again Israel was not supplied by the Yanks, nor did any American soldiers take part on Israel's side. 1973, no American soldiers, but yes a resupplying of weapons, and thank you for that. Since 67, America has become Israel's greatest friend supplying arms, money and political support. Yet not one American soldier has had to risk his life for Israel. But once again thanx.

Letting Ahmadinejad speak at Columbia is not analogous to letting a re-existant Hitler speak at Auschwitz...in the 2nd case Hitler already commmited his attempt at extermination ...right now Ahmadinejad is only in his preparatory phase of his nefarious plan of extermination.. The proper analogy would be if Hitler was allowed to spout Mein Kampf to the universities and media accross the USA in say 1937-8 before WWII started...WOULD his plan have been nipped in the bud by this "exposure" and publicity-condemnation? Would America have warned him off or actually have prepared for war with Germany that early if that had happened instead of waiting till 1941 when Germany's axis ally Japan attacked at Pearl Harbour? MAYBE... But we shall never know... Looking back--many would have wished Hitler had his chance to spew his venom and be chastized in the American public's eye --so maybe some good and possble Holocaust prevention may have resulted,or earlier American entry to WWII.

Yes americans should let a man who is responsible for deaths of american soldiers speak at a college as if he was just an academic. But hey as you say, it benefits israel. Is that what you think american soldiers are for? To defend the jewish state? We are glad to support an ally. But we will not forever be your sacrifice upon your altar.

Hey Johnboy, now this is another moment when I must wonder whether this stuff is just agenda driven or you are playing dumb? or dumb? You wrote: "But ask yourself, FOX; did Iran or Russia suffer genocide when those regimes failed? Did either get "wiped off the map"?" my answer to myself and your question was RUBBISH! the Soviet Union imploded. There was no foreign attack with nuclear missles that left pop concentrations pulverized. Gorbaschev realized he was bankrupt, showed humiliation and understanding and came to the conclusion that the Soviets must change. No war. As for Iran, I suspect that you do not have a clue re: the Iranian rev. Early stages, was led by the Left, mujahadeen and students. Their mistake, agreeing to Khomeinis return never imagining his end game, which left thousands of revolutionaries tortured in Ahmanhajad's prisons. Israel is not imploding, but being incessantly attacked by Iran proxies. Wake up sir, don't play dumb.

Johnboy from your writing style I have a sense of intelligence, but from Your conclusions I wonder, I wonder if you are playing dumb or whether your agenda forces you to adopt some rather rediculous notions. I have read the Tehran boy's speeches. I also realize that you think many of us Jews are irrational and parranoid, sorry buddy but we have a hell of alot of good reasons to fear folks like Ahmanny and you. "Holocaust Denial...sure this subject may have, due to oil dollars, once again popped its head up amoungst the salons of Europe and Riyadh, but for four decades this was only kept alive and spouted by Neo Nazis! As for being only against the "zionist regime", he has spoken against the Jewish State, thus meaning the regime in your eyes. droll. A jewish state is important to most jews, and it will stay a Jewish zionist regime, as long as a refuge for Jews is necessary. Thus making Iran a present danger.

A-jad's presentation at Columbia showed him in a very negative light. It also showed us that he is definitely not a nut, but rather a wiley politician. He was speaking to his own constituents back home, which is fine for him politically. But it showed America something about his character: anti-Semetic; anti-gay; someone who denies the Holocaust and tries to twist history to his own political ends, etc. If anything, his appearance at Columbia lessened his credibility. So, while I had doubts about the wisodm of what they did, I now say "Thanks, Columbia!"

Johnboy #269: "That just about covers it, I think. Or do you wish to re-enter the fray?" Daybreak (#272): Daybreak (#273): Daybreak (#274): Daybreak (#275): I guess not then.......

Mr. Burston hit the nail on the head!

You are wrong. Johnboy is very very right. And we aren't just talking about your ridiculous claims of plagiarism. You were born wrong. You are so wrong, right is now left, and what's not wrong is even more so. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

You are wrong. Johnboy is very very right. And we aren't just talking about your ridiculous claims of plagiarism. You were born wrong. You are so wrong, right is now left, and what's not wrong is even more so. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Just a meaningless chant instead? OK. I claim the victory by default, since you have taken your bat and your ball and declared that you now longer wish to play the game. Fine by me: Ahmadinejad never said he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map" Khomeini never said he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map" The experts Bronner consulted in his NY Time article admit (grudgingly) that the original translation of Khomeini's words were in error, but that nobody noticed at the time. Which means that news services that simply reproduce that same erroneous translation for Ahmadinejad's quoting of Khomeini's words must also be in error. Khomeini said: "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the stage of time". Ahmadinejad said: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the pages of time". That just about covers it, I think. Or do you wish to re-enter the fray?

I agree,let Nejad speak ,but for a reason different than the one you refer to.Let your own people realize that what Israel is doing to the Palestinians is much more than what Hitler done to the Jews.What can be worse than denying the Pals water,elictricity,importing and exporting their needs of food and medicine,closing borders indefinately,preventing students to travel to resume their education etc etc just name it.You keep fooling your people of the dangers of Qassam and Hamas and your IDF knows before any one else about their ineffectivity.Millions of people europeon and others feel and wrote that the Holocaust is a myth,and your treatment to the Pals is realy worse than Nazi like actions.You help yourself by accepting other opinions.you always think that you are a nation of no mistakes and fatal ones,you know that this is wrong but your arrogancy disallows you of admitting that.Wake up,the new media made the whole world transparent,people see and hear excepy you.

I will note ONCE AGAIN that Daybreak is attempting to change the subject AWAY from his loosing argument regarding the meaning of Ahmadinejad's speech. Nonetheless, a reply.... D: "the practice of claiming, or IMPLYING, original authorship of (OR incorporating material from) someone else's creative work" How about defining "creative work"? Res 181 is not D'Amato's "creative work", nor is the Mandate text, so while I can not reproduce D'Amato's text as my own, the facts themselves are not "his". They simply EXIST, Daybreak, irrespective of wether D'Amato exists or is a fictional character. All moot, Daybreak, for the simple reason that talkback simply is NOT a scholarly work; you prove it every time YOU reguritate zionist propaganda without attribution.

In your response to Gina, you cite as examples troops killed during a time of war. Possibly Gina was referring to the killing of US Marines by Iran-funded terroritst or the invasion of the US Embassy in Iran and the capture and holding of the staff. This man has been identified as one of those involved in the latter disgraceful episode. Neither of these occurred when the US was at war with Iran.

You wrote: "plagiarism would come from reproducing entire sentences without putting them in quotes." Really? The Wikipedia entry on plagiarism defines it as the "practice of claiming or IMPLYING (OR incorporating material from) someone else's creative work, in whole or in part, into one's own WITHOUT ADEQUATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT." That is exactly what you did. The evidence is there in your posts on this thread and the thread on which you originally posted "your" translation of the speech.

You wrote: "...plagiarism would come from reproducing entire sentences from others without putting them in quotes." Really? Wikipedia, in its plagiarism entry, defines it as "the practice of claiming, or IMPLYING, original autorship of (OR incorporating material from) someone else's creative work, in whole or in part, into one's own WITHOUT ADEQUATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT." That is exactly what you did. The evidence is there in your posts on this thread and on the thread on which you originally posted "your" translation of the speech.

I find it highly amusing when people use the term freedom of speech without knowing exactly where it comes from and what the actual amendment meands. The writers who composed the Constitution left a lot out that we seem to accept aand kept things in that we no longer accept. One of these is the right of women to votem the 9other is the denial of the right of people to hold others in servitude. The first amendment to the constitution merely prevents congress , the federal government, from restricting the right of a citizen to speak freely. Wen you use this as an argument for letting the President of Iran speak, I have to ask when he became a US citizen. Columbia had the freedom as a private institution to invite him to speak, however injudicious that invitation might have been. I have the freedom as a Columbia alumna to decide to stop any contributions to that institution. But freedom of speech designated in the Bill of Rights amendment to the US Constitution would not apply here

D: "Johnboy the Proven Plagiarist See My Earlier Posts" And see my reply; talkback is not a scholarly pursuit; it is no more improper for me to form my own opinions from reading other web sites than it would be if I formed the same opinions by listening to a lecture by Tony D'Amato. There is no "plagiarism" involved in then expressing those opinions; plagiarism would come from reproducing entire *sentences* from others without putting them in quotes, but I haven't done that. Talkback is an anonymous medium, Daybreak, so the entire basis of your argument is ludicrous; for all YOU know I *am* Juan Cole, or when pointing Tosefta to Tony D'Amato's web site I may simply be discussing something with *another* of my aliases. I will note, though, that you have now abandoned the central argument and are now concentrating only on smearing me. You have conceded the facts, I assume?

ur universities are not a place for today's Hitler to videotape news pieces for internal consumption in his own country. It is not for us in the States to give the enemy any legitimacy, and by allowing this murderous man access to our schools and time on our news shows was extremely stupid. The overwhelming majority of us know he is evil, but most of us have not taken the time to learn about his beliefs and what the Islamic Republic regime is all about to interpret his seemingly insane rants. I know what he said. I know what his idea of good is, what righteousness is to him, and what peace is to him. I know exactly what this man said to us all in his very first sentence of his speech and what he hopes to usher in and do it in the near future. I just hope the U.S. military stops him DEAD in his tracks in the next few months, and the sooner the better.

He made no friends by suggesting there were no homosexuals in Iran, something that makes his claim of no nuclear weapons research look even more ludicrous. However the emphasis has been focused on the threat his country poses to us. The threats they pose to others has been shuffled off in to the back rooms. Iran is not just Israel's problem, any more than the wars in Serbia and Kashmir and Russia can be ended by sacrificing Israel. The Jihad would make everyone its victim and everyone needs to understand this.

F: "From all your many posts it is apparent that you would regoice at the destruction of Israel and it`s Jewish residents." No, and that you think this says much more about YOUR insecurities regarding Israel than anything it says about MY feelings towards Israel and its Jewish popln. Israel is a nation. Its fate is its own to decide, and it is as legitimate a nation as any other on this planet. I do not want to see it destroyed. I do not wish for violence to be visited upon its popln. But I look at its zionist policies, FOX, and I see apartheid South Africa at its worst; arrogant, aggressive, abusive, oppressive, and a rogue nation. That was South Africa in the '70s and '80s, FOX, and I detested it. But I did not wish South Africa to be destroyed, nor the white popln of South Africa to be slaughtered. I wanted them to wake up and face reality and, fortunately, they did. I want Israel to do the same, but I fear that it won't.

Because it is a reasonable question. The answer is this: Ahmadinejad is attacked because his DETRACTORS are unable to distinguish between a) a regime in control of a country and b) the popln of that country While he does. That allows them to pretend that he is preaching GENOCIDE, when he is really advocating REGIME CHANGE. Substituting one for the other allows them to plead for a pre-emptive attack on Iran that is otherwise unjustifiable. Ahmadinejad detests Israel, and he makes no bones about it. But this issue revolves around WHY he detests Israel. Is it because it's full of Jews? Or because he hates its zionist policies? His speeches read IN FULL makes it clear it's the latter; he repeatedly compares zionism with the Shah's regime in Iran, and the Soviet regime in Russia, and he predicts zionism will share their fate. But ask yourself, FOX; did Iran or Russia suffer genocide when those regimes failed? Did either get "wiped off the map"?

He thinks that I gathered the translation from Juan Cole. I did not, tho I was quite aware of that work. My source of the translation is here: http://www.mohammadmossadegh.com/news/rumor-of-the-century/ I made no secret that I do not speak Farsi, therefore I had to have sourced the translation from someone else as, indeed, YOU do without attribution. But as I pointed out to JES in another talkback: Either the original Farsi that I quote is correct, or it is not. Either the translation I quote is accurate, or it is not. i.e. ACCURACY of the translated words is the issue, not its source. Talkback is not a scholarly work, Daybreak, so arguing about attribution is nothing more than an attempt to distract. As for D'Amato's work, you are misinformed; I VOLUNTEERED to Tosefta that the points I was advancing were not unique but were those of D'Amato, and I provided Tosefta with the links so that anyone interested can read it for themselve.

R: "So why Wouldn`t A deny that he said that?" Coz he only speaks Farsi, Rob, not english. He has allowed the english-speaking officials in his govt to deny the translation: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2005/12/16/iran_holocaust051216.html http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/16/iran.israel/ http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2005/12/16/iran_holocaust051216.html http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/02/20/iran_denies_wanting_to_wipe_israel_off_the_map/ http://www.france24.com/france24Public/en/administration/afp-news.html?id=070518144544.3s9xsh15&cat=null http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708633879&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=5/19/2007&Cat=2&Num=003 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-05/19/content_6121124.htm http://english.people.com.cn/200705/19/eng20070519_375995.html

for as Dan Gillerman Ambassador at the UN says that he even Aids Israel's Public Relations! if he only knows.

Of course the neo-cons and Jews in the US should not be left to approve who should speak in America. On the other hand, while the Iranian President make valid points he again makes it seem that the MOSSAD writes his lines. The neo-cons will be able to say that "Iran has confirmed that it has no nukes and no homosexuals." As for the brow beaten Pres of Columbia U: would he have described Israel's President Katsav as a rapist? Yet, it seems that some American deal is being worked out with Iran since Saddam Bush was hands off about the president of his 'axis of evil'

How 'modern' are Chavez and Amadinedchad or even the Syrian politicans ? Is it modern to oppress other people ? Is it modern to hang innocent women and young people ? Is it modern to oppress the free speech of an entire nation ? That is not modern, that is purely communistic oppressing and does lead only to suffering of entire innocent populations! Wake up and realize the truth....COMMUNISM is the evil of the world, just like CAPITALISM is...!

I'm European and trust me, I know that the Holocaust did exist. Amongst jews there was one uncle of mine, a catholic priest, who did die in a concentrate camp amongst jewish people. All my affection and love go out towards the jewish people who suffered so much during WWII ! That now a person like Amadinedschad shows up in the USA and speaks against the Holocaust is done only to fool the people. Amadinedschad is denying the truth, because he wants that the entire world denies the truth! I truly think that we should not give so much options to Amadinedschad to speak out his mind, because he knows very well what he mentions is not the truth! Even if Amadinedschad would visit Yad Vashem, he would still continue denying the Holocaust and I think I know the reason behind it: to stir up the world against Israel ! He will now succeed, because the God of Israel is the same God of us Catholics ! We stand firm behind all those who suffer underneath wrong-doers like Amadinedschad !

This is not the first time Johnboy has used someone else's work on Talkback without attribution. For quite a while he was using very specific ideas from Professor D'Amato of Northwestern University School of Law from an article on Israel's borders before someone challenged Johnboy on those ideas and he finally attributed them to D'Amato after having passed them off as his own for a considerable length of time.

It is now clear to me that the Amazon entry itself I provided the URL to in my other post was taken from Juan Cole, so this is the ultimate source from which Johnboy took his translation and transliteration without attribution.

To see EXACTLY where Johnboy lifted (completely without attribution) "his" translation AND TRANSLITERATION of Ahmadinejad's speech from in his post #382 (08:27, 22/09/07) in the Talkback thread to the (Haaretz) article by Reuters titled NY Mayor: Columbia can invite Ahmadinejad... go to: www.amazon.com/tag/politics/forum?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1S3QSZRUL93V8&cdThread=Tx3GA9BCCVZ3HMD or, google the terms "farsi Ahmadinejad" and click on retrieved item (fourth from top in my search) titled "Amazon.com Did Ahmadinejad really say he wanted to wipe Israel....": it is the first entry there, dated Sept. 15, 2007.

Johnboy what I do not get, is why you are arguing that Ahmanijad does not want to destroy Israel? From all your many posts it is apparent that you would regoice at the destruction of Israel and it's Jewish residents. So why not celebrate your boy's words? Explain. As for his intentions: We can start with "Death to America Day", that's a good one. Now what could that possibly mean? april 15, 06, At the opening of conference supporting the Palesinians. "Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation...The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm." also that "the existence of this Israeli regime is a permanent threat" to the Middle East, and that "Its existence has harmed the dignity of Islamic nations." do you disagree with his words? if not why all the trouble disproving the allegations. Or does he disgust your western sense of class exhort you to put perfume on this pig."

Back in 2005 I was visiting a friend in New York. He was a Columbia student specializing in Mid eastern languages, including Farsi. When the news of Ahmanijad's statement came out, he was swamped with emails from fellow Iranphiles arguing about what he had said. Did he say "Wipe Israel off the Map?" I asked. My friend was terribly anti-zionist and replied. "No, he did not day that exactly" "So?" "But it did add up to wiping Israel off the map" he chortled. Fine Johnboy, I realize you have googled his actual words, and Daybreak has explained that the words on their own translated into english to not explain the nuance of the phrasing. So let us toss that line out, and list the many times on other occasions that Ahmanijad has called for wiping out Israel. dec 1, 06 Doha, Qatar, Israel is "on the verge of disappearing" dec 12, second day of holocaust conference, said "Israel will be wiped out soon". There is more Johnboy.... enjoy.... cont...

Well the autocrat stated, that there are "No Homosexuals in Iran" thus it is not a problem. Yha babies this is what we are dealing with. I understand that homosexuality is only an issue when it suits your side, but here it is for you folks on the left who have long worked hard in harvesting the Gay communities support and economic backing. How can you be so cold to the fact that it is illegal to be gay in Iran, and culturally so unacceptable as to be ignored or brutally opposed. Guess all the Iranian gays moved to LA, or they are in hiding. ahmanijad, found it far too easy to lie to his crowd of cheering lefties, who were forced to swallow at his "No homosexuals in Iran" reply, reqalizing that he is a homo-phobe...what to do..what to do?!

I listened to the speech on the radio, via the internet, and he did not bother to answer the destroying Israel issue. Instead he called for a referendum. Hmmmm, either his advisors have given him the proper advice when speaking to those who believe in democracy, or he is just sidestepping the issue. Many here ask for facts regarding Iran and the jews. How about "Destroy Israel and America Day" celebrated anually across Iran. Would you American neo-left appreciate a "Hate Iran Day" and happily send your children off to scream slogans, hmmmmm...maybe. As it is he is a wonderful tool for the Left, which bases all its worldview on the Hating of America. So to bring in an avid Hater, he will unashamedly call for your heads, and the destruction of your society. No Bradley, Ahmanijad is a propoganda star, who works Western puffed hair journalists like a tourist in a Tehran Bizzarre.

When pressed, all A says is that PALESTINIAN JEWS (what beast is this?) should make peace with Pal Moslems...presumably after Israel is wiped of the face of time, or map (about same in Farsi images) and has all become Palestine.

I agree 100 percent. Ahmadinejad is practically doing our homework for us. By preventing him from speaking we provide "proof" to those who say we control the media, and we arguably interfere with freedom of expression, thereby doing his homework. I'm all for him speaking out and removing all doubt about how evil he is.

D: "Yes, an astonishing admission, that I don`t have a mindlessly simplistic, either-or view of this issue (or other issues). That must come as a real shocker to an impoverished mind like yours, which is incapable of looking honestly at both sides of an issue." Laughable. Simply laughable. You say that now because you have been challenged over your statments, but a day from now, or a week from now, YOU will pop up again and SAY that Ahmadinenejad referred to "wiping Israel off the map". And when you do so YOU will make no qualification, no disclaimer, no prevarication. YOU will say it with a certainty, Daybreak, just as you have done in the past, and in other talkback. And you will do so because YOUR statement above is simply the humbug of a hypocrite.

D: "The article quotes Ahmad Zeidabadi, a professor of political science in Tehran, as follows: in translating Khomeni`s statement "the word `map` was used because it appeared to be the best meaningful translation for what he said." Did he say mistranslation? No he said "best meaningful translation." Got it?" I understood it, Daybreak, even if you didn't. Look at the next line: "Maybe it was interpreted as 'book of countries,' and the closest thing to that was a map. Since then, we have often heard 'Israel bayad az naghshe jographya mahv gardad' ? Israel must be wiped off the geographical map." So: IF someone DID want to refer to "wiping off a map" THEN they would use THESE words: "Israel bayad az naghshe jographya mahv gardad" Which are NOT the words Khomeini used. Zeidabadi is admitting the original translation is wrong, without coming out and actually rapping you on the skull with it. GET IT, DAYBREAK?????

D: "I suggest that you write directly to Al Jazeera and other news organizations that translated his speech as wipe Israel off the map rather than to me, because, you see, I have very little to do with the way Al Jazeera and other organizations report Ahmadinejad`s speeches." Al Jezeera admit that THEY did no translation of Ahmedinejad's speech at all, but simply took the copy that was published on IRNA without checking it. So I WILL continue to address this issue to YOU, because YOU continue to insist that news agencies like Al Jezeera actually translated his words, when they did not. You continue to misrepresent Ahmadinejad, and you continue to misrepresent the reporting of his words. YOU do, Daybreak, so stop pointing to Other People and saying: "blame them then".

You wrote: "The newspapers like Haaretz are stating categorically that he said those words." If you don't like the way the media have reported on Ahmadinejad's speech then I suggest that you write directly to Al Jazeera and other news organizations that translated his speech as wipe Israel off the map rather than to me, because, you see, I have very little to do with the way Al Jazeera and other organizations report Ahmadinejad's speeches.

No. You read him again. The article quotes Ahmad Zeidabadi, a professor of political science in Tehran, as follows: in translating Khomeni's statement "the word 'map' was used because it appeared to be the best meaningful translation for what he said." Did he say mistranslation? No he said "best meaningful translation." Got it?

Yes, an astonishing admission, that I don't have a mindlessly simplistic, either-or view of this issue (or other issues). That must come as a real shocker to an impoverished mind like yours, which is incapable of looking honestly at both sides of an issue.

D: "I have stated several times on the other thread, to which you responded earlier, that, given the misquotation, reasonable people can differ over what he meant." Then the reporting SHOULD REFLECT THAT UNCERTAINTY. Yet it doesn't; you and JES and all the other warmongers are stating CATEGORICALLY that he said those words. The newspapers like Haaretz are stating CATEGORICALLY that he said those words. No attempt is made to suggest that his words are open to other interpretations, yet you have just admitted that there is exactly that uncertainty over what he said. YOU should therefore be saying that "it is alleged that Ahmedinejad said..." or "some translations have alleged that Ahmedinejad said...". But no such qualification is ever made. The reporting of his speech are ALL (bar one) derived entirely from the foreign press lifting the original (mis)translation on IRNA. The only exception was Israel's own MEMRI - who supports MY argument, not yours.

D: "The phrase translated as map is in the original quotation." Read Bronner again and you will see that he makes NO CLAIM THAT THE ORIGINAL TRANSLATION WAS CORRECT. Here is what Bronner said: "Khomeini's words were abstract: 'Sahneh roozgar.' Sahneh means scene or stage, and roozgar means time. The phrase was widely interpreted as 'map,' and for years, no one objected. " He is admitting that the original translations were not definiative, and obscures that point by saying that "no one objected". Of course not; no one paid any attention to the old man's words at the time. Go on, Daybreak, look at it again: The translation of Khomeini's words went from: "Sahneh roozgar" = "stage" + "time" = "map" A phrase referring to an event in time - not a location - is translated into "map"; Bronner had to quickly handwave he way through THAT, especially as there is a perfectly good Farsi word for "map" - "nagsheh" - that was never uttered. You've been duped, Daybreak.

YES, OUR TAX DOLLARS!! Who the hell pays for the security of the little monkey when he travels? Yes, the same people who paid for the Sharon gorilla when he was here. It is an entitlement accorded every head of state. Why do you think that he should not be allowed to speak? No matter what he says, it can?t be detrimental to your country. Or is Israel your country?

Daybreak, I am not a lawyer, but I am a news junkie. I recall reading about illegal immigrants and a court ruling that they were entitled to due process. Also, numerous instances where they (illegals) were entitled to all social services and public accommodations such as schools. I don?t know why they wouldn?t have the same basic freedoms that everyone enjoys.

Why did Hitler get away with he did? Why did the allies allow Hitler to take Austria, Sudaten Land, and the all the rest of Czechoslovakia? Simple. Hitler was thought to be only against Jews. The world did not lift a finger against him as long as he was against Jews. The British and French "honered" the guarantee to Poland by not firing a single shot (they did make declare war though). The British and French would still be not have fired a single shot had Hitler not attacked them. The reason - Hitler was thought as being against Jews. Any war againgst Hitler would be viewed as a War to protect Jews. So you see Ahmadinejad is doing the same thing. The world will not stop him. If Saadam Huesien would have g-d forbid taken over Isreal instead of Iraq, you can bet your bottom dollar that no country would risk a single soldier to save a Jew. Ahmadinejad understands the world better than you do.

Let him speak? Have you people not heard enough from this person? Columbia shame on you, this is the person responsible for the death on wounding of our soldiers. Besides lies what else can you hear?

I don't think I said it did not extend. I am a lawyer, but to be honest I'm really not sure about this question. Actually, I was hoping I might be able to learn something from you if you had some sound legal basis for your opinion.

After the lies and spin of the recent years - who would believe anything any government said anywhere. Surely the whole idea of a university is to facilitate exchange of information and allow students to make up their own minds. Access to the The CBS interview is available here - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/20/60minutes/main3282230.shtml Make up your own minds - it's refreshing !

Why should you link Iran with 9/11 attacks? Can you name one Iranian in the terrorists caused 9/11? The Iranians were one of the first nations who condolence with Americans right after the attacks by cremate their candles.

What statute or case or other legally authoritative pronouncement do you base your opinion on regarding this First-Amendment right NOT extending to non-citizen foreign visitors to the United States?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odf6GtsLfes&mode=related&search=

What statute or case or other legally authoritative pronouncement do you base your opinion on regarding this First-Amendment right extending to non-citizen foreign visitors to the United States?

Steve in Ithaca: Rather selective about who gets freedom and who doesn`t, aren`t you? Not at all. I didn?t say anything about any of those instances.

I didn't say anything about Colombia or private property. Obviously speaking at Colombia would not be an issue about freedom of speech. My post was correct in that I was correcting another psot that said this right was only available to US citizens. Eitherway, as an American I see nothing wrong and everything right about Colombia inviting him to speak. Not that I agree, but better to know his intentions than to ignore him.

No, Johnboy, everyone should read your posts to see how words can be twisted. Ahmadinejad was quoting from Khomeni. That much is clear and undisputed. He misquoted him, as the Times article notes. The phrase translated as map is in the original quotation. That is no doubt why Al Jazeera, among others, translated it as wipe off the map. I have stated several times on the other thread, to which you responded earlier, that, given the misquotation, reasonable people can differ over what he meant. But reasonable people don't insist they are right are right, and anyone who disagrees (like Al Jazeera) is wrong (especially when, like you, they don't even understand the language from which they are pretending to provide a definitive translation). I don't waste my time with irrational nut-cases such as yourself, so this is the end of the discussion.

American in NY - Where was your outrage when military recruiters were banned, or when the ROTC was kicked off campus, or when students stormed the stage violently denying the right to free speech to the Minutemen, or when a combat veteran was shouted down and denied his right to free speech? Rather selective about who gets freedom and who doesn't, aren't you?

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects against the infringement of freedom of speech by the government and its institutions. Columbia University is not a government institution but a private university.

Sure, let him speak. It's a free speech issue after all. Why then, has Columbia denied the right to free speech to the Minutemen, the Creationists, those in support of the war, anti-abortion groups, American military Veterans, military recruiters, Christians, anti-Socialists, Bridgetter Gabriel, Walid Shoebat or John Hagee? Free speech for me and not for thee, eh Columbia?

Because you tell me to go read Ethan Bronner's rather astonishing piece in the NY TIMES. This one, for those interested: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/weekinreview/11bronner.html?ex=1307678400&en=efa2bd266224e880&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Everyone should read it, just to see how words can be twisted. Because Bronner points out that Khomeini's original words had "Sahneh roozgar", which means "stage of time", which is often translated as "map". But Ahmadinejad DIDN'T SAY THAT PHRASE, as Bronner himself admits; he said "Safheh roozgar", which means exactly what I claimed it meant; "pages of time" or "pages of history". Which means by Bronner's own admission he DIDN'T say and COULDN'T have said "wiped off the map". So how does Bronner answer his own question: "So did Iran's president call for Israel to be wiped off the map? It certainly seems so." even after he had just TOLD THE READER that Ahmadinejad said no such thing. You've been duped, Daybreak.

In the U.S., the right to freedom of speech is accorded only to U.S. citizens. (Josh Korn) Not true! anyone who steps foot on our soil has all the protection of all of our laws.

Dang you're one ignorant bitch for Allah aren't you? Does someone pay you to post shi'ite all day or is it a part of your probation? Go beg in one of your Jihadist backwater bergs. No one shivs a git for you or your shi'ite filled rhetoric. No one on earth. Insane old whore.

Good fences make good neighbors. If your mad dog baby strap bombers would stop terror, they could be considered human and perhaps no fence would be necessary. China did pretty well with a fence, and America will too as well as Israel. Criminals must be seperated from peaceful citizens. Perhaps covert operations are thwarted and stopped. Betcha never complained while Israelis were being murdered. Poor lil' terrorists.. No one but you understands them. he he

You pathetic old whore for Islam, why do you keep bothering us with your mangy rants? Women in your religion are to be silent, dressed in black and have been 'altered' surgically as not to have full body parts for pleasure. Oh! That helps explain your expertise. Sour grapes with sour body. Yuk, you disgust me. Go back to the camel market and try and sell whatever you have left to the camel drivers or, the camels. Either one is fine. Just gooooooo

Actually, Johnboy, you don't know what you are talking about. If you would take the time to read the New York Times article of June 11, 2006, by Ethan Bronner, on the translation issues, which deals with the word map, rather than wasting your time and everyone else's pretending to translate from a language you don't understand, you will see why.

All people are the same. Believe me I know ;-) It's the circumstances that determine how people think.

Not letting Ahmadinejad speak relies on the same message Bush has been sending Americans for some 7 years- that Democracy is not strong enough to combat terrorism, that drowning out freedom of speech, respecting civil liberties and complying with the Constitution somehow imperils the principles we hold dear. Nothing is further from truth. Let the despot speak, subject him to informed critisizm, and let his points of view be brought into the light of reason. What do we have to fear? Carl Johnson

Today's New York Times has an interesting article, which points out that the Iranian Presidency does not have the same status as the US presidency, and that Ahmadinejad has lost a great deal of credibility in his own country due to his wild statements. They point out that all the vituperation poured on him by the west is actually bouying him up. I suggest you read the article, and understand that he can do nothing to you just by speaking. Why all the fear then? I just cannot understand what is going on in this column. Every country has its share of nutters who want to drive somebody into the sea, and few of them ever get the power to do so. The worat effect so far has been on his own country!

dear #187,despicable is urself and ur officials.

So-called Israel was not only operating behind the scenes via their very own neo-cons months and weeks before the Yankee attack on Iraq; they continue to operate more or less openly in Iraq. Because of the IDF specialized knowledge of Arabic and torture, zionists were hired into many functions in post-occupation Iraq: for example, as 'inquisitors' in Abu Graib (check it out on the internet, if you don't believe me). Before the bombing of the Golden Temple (shi'ite), neighbours told of Hebrew being spoken in the hours before the attack. As we all know, the 180,000 (or more) mercenaries operating in Iraq under Blackwell and other companies are usually veterans of other cynical wars. These folks are paid extremely well, and there are many so-called Israelis and South African Boers, as well as the usual Yankees. So-called Israel has many bones to chew in Iraq. Regarding the missing millions in Iraq: apparently they found their way, via Paul Brenner, to Tel Aviv (for services rendered).

Indraya, I don't know what kind of country you want to live in, but Chavez, Ahmedinejad, Assad and Kim (because you should include that one in the list of the partners !) are not envisaging the kind of state anyone with options would like to live in. The only way they can govern is with the menace of their Secret Service, and their army's willingness to prove (google on Hama, for example) the threat isn't void. You can shout all you want, but it doesn't make sense: people want to live safe and in freedom, with the ability to say and think what they want. These elements are absent in your favorite regimes !

Anyone of us who is party to the Internet can receive Al-Jazeera, televised on line.

When the Jews cried out to the world for help against Hitler nobody would listen. Here we are once again in the same situation Iran's intensions is to wipe Israel from the map and once again nobody is listening. Ahamdinejab inreturn is rewarded and welcomed to talk at the university. This monster does not deserve freedom of speach . Fredom of speach does not exist in his vocabuary.

You can link to as many web pages and news reports, etc., as you like, Daybreak, and all you are doing is proving that they are feeding off each other. Ahmadinejad said this: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." The Farsi word for "map" is "nagsheh", so it is quite impossible that he said the phrase "wipe off the map", coz he never uttered the word "nagsheh". So ANY source that claims he uttered the phrase "wiped off the map" is either (a) unadvertantly *paraphrasing* him, rather than *quoting* him or is (b) out-and-out lying. Translating each word gives this: Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from). Or, stripped of the Farsi: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". There is no "threat" to be found anywhere in that sentence.

Israelis have denied the halocaust that they inflicted on Palestinians for ages. I love Ahmadinejad! He's giving you bastards right back what you dish out! Hahhaha Eat your soup scumbags...

He was one of my favorite too. Solomon Gurski book had me in stitches. He reaad parts of it here in Melbourne a few years ago.

You are missing the point. Nobody is afraid.... but a destructive, ignorant worm can rub decent pple the wrong way. He has insulted our dead, and hurt us, survivors, implying we did not go through hell at the hands of the Nazis.Why continue hurting us, unless that is the agenda

There she goes burbling away again. So sorry Jane. She slipped her leash this time. You ask why the leash? hehe well... She has an obsession at the moment. She has decided that she's a dog and that she hates people in uniform. She keeps barking at the doorman of the building down the road. We have to keep her on a leash or else she bites him.

That's the kind of person who opposes Israel, I suppose. Admitted racists. People who judge others by their origins. What is your race Rubio, or don't you have one?

How do you know that Dr. Ahminejad is a "despicable man"? Please do answer this question so that we can see whether you are still anchored by gravity on the face of this planet or perhaps propelled into outer space on the fuel of your own nonsensical words?

Lynn, what you are describing in #154 to Josh Korn on what would happen to grants to Columbia by allowing Ahmadinejad to talk is Jewish blackmail at its ugliest and nothing you should be proud of. It's bad enough Brandeis lost 5 millions simply because it let Carter speak there and there was a threat that Du Paul would also lose 5 million by not dumping Finklestein and now more threats of losing another 5 millions against Barnard if it doesn't dump Nadia el-Haj. Mehreen Larudee was also denied tenure at Du Paul because she backed Finklestein and because she is a Chicago chapter member of the Jewish Voice for Peace. Other academics harrassed are Rachid Khalidi, Juan Cole, Khalil Shikaki and Natana De Long-Bas and last month you had the T-shirt thing in NYC. Also, the British Zionist Federation did a good job on muzzling Haaretz' Danny Rubinstein. There is no limit to how low Jews are going to muzzle people and now this thing with Ahmadinejad. Shame, shame.

...I`ll never step foot in a Reform Temple again! So help me God!... Please go to the Mosque, say two "kalimah syahadah," may God save your soul, Yossy, buddy.

Strange though, despite all the harsh talked of eliminating every jews on Earth, Iran still have like 500,000 jews who enjoy more rights then the Arabs in Israel. nobody bulldoze their house, nobody kick them out of their land, nobody discriminate them in jobs or businesses and nobody stop them at the checkpoint. they walk and talk freely. If Ahmedinejad really is the Hitler reincarnated, he would've put all those jews in concentration camp already.

....and we can all start to respond to his lie or truth whichever way you choose to believe him. Off course those that love him will love him even if he lies and those that hate him will hate him nevertheless even if he tells the truth. So what difference does it make if A MAD JIHAD will to lie or tell the truth in the UN!!!!

Tobia, hard as it may be for you to accept, America is not Jewish nor is it a satellite of Israel so it can invite anyone that it wishes to invite. Through a brainwashing process that began many years ago, people in the States were made to believe that Israel was a part of them and the same thing happened in Israel about making the Israelis think they were really Americans but of the Judaic faith. This is folklore and the average American is waking up and realizing to where the Israel adventure has been taking America. There is a small problem of reality in all of this and it's reflected in what you wrote to me and to others. America does not need the Jewish consent to invite speakers to American universities no matter how much you or Dershowitz jump up and down in dismay.

Tosefta, you don't have to worry about any learning impairment on my part, I understood what you meant the first time around but you took the discussion on a side-trip. You are stuck on the subject of Israel's paranoia while I'm asking you to also consider that Iran would not dare attack Israel in fear of what would happen to it from the Americans, the Europeans and Islamic countries and now Israel is doing a repeat of what it did on Iraq. It is feeding the Jewish hysteria that Iran will have the bomb and this means the end of Israel, therefore Iran must be bombed with or without America's help. This is what happened in Iraq and look at Iraq today and what the US and Israel have done to it. Yes, Israel because it was Israeli pressure on the Americans that made it happen in Iraq and now Israel is pulling the same stunt about Iran. This is a more dangerous and efficient way to destroy a country than a couple of nuclear warheads that Israel brags it would never use. It's wicked.

Wasn't Barney Panofsky a character in one of Mordecai Richler's novels? One of my favorite authors. Joshua Then and Now is his best novel, I think, but I love them all. Great posting name.

Yeah, real ironic. You claim we can't get Al Jazeera on cable in the U.S. (although it is in fact available on some cable stations here according to the Associated Press) and you claim this is because of "various lobbies." You provide no evidence whatever of a causal relation between lobbying efforts and Al Jazeera not being made available by many cable providers. Cable providers who don't carry Al Jazeera say the decision was made on "financial grounds." (National Public Radio, Nov. 14, 2006). Perhaps they are lying (though in my experience it is USUALLY a mistake to underestimate the importance of "financial grounds" as the actual reason for such decisions). If you can prove a causal relation between lobbies and lack of Al Jazeera in the U.S. please do. Hint: demonstrating a causal relation requires a rigorous methodology, and not just a bit of anecdotal evidence.

There are two categories of people who would invite this man on a prestigious university campus. The first category includes those who secretly admire the man for giving the United States, its president, as well as Israel, all considered as imperialists and colonialists, some sleepless nights. The second category is made up of those who think that they can show the man to be a lunatic, or a monster, and are sure that they can outsmart him. The first category is made up of the vile and contemptable; the second category is made up of the self important, the narcissist, and they will have found a kindred spirit in their guest. He will beat them at their own game.

These days being called an Anti Semite doesnt quite pack the same punch as it used to.( crying wolf).. in fact my son and all his friends regard it as a badge of honour, something they have noticed you aquire as a result of speaking the truth. Lets just all put our heads down and really work towards the embarrasment, isolation and eventual dismantling of that purulent state we know as Israel. Shalom

We'd still find some excuse to make war and kill each other. Be it over Natallie losing a rattle, Clickfool wetting his pants, Indy spilling his rice, or Yosemite wiping his sheeeit all over the walls. We'd still be fighting! Have a pleasant month of Ramadan if that's what you're into!

to #179....I think you will find thats because most people have had enough the jews!

Your hypothesis ("Iran`s participation in the murder of US troops" has several links missing, as do you and "truthful" Jane herself. 1. Troops are not 'murdered'; they die at war and, in the case of Iraq, a war of their own choosing; 2. How do we know that Iran supplies weapons to the Iraqi people, fighting to free their country from US occupation? You (and Jane) apparently take the words of the bought-and-paid-for US mouths as "truth". Iran has challenged the USofA to publicly bring this "truth" forward, which the USofA has not done. However, you too are in for a dime and in for a dollar regarding your propensities to believe every and all bits of propaganda thrown your way. I certainly think that Iran, as a neighbouring country to Iraq, has every and all right to arm whomever they wish in Iraq. However, the USofA has not proven this point, even though challenged to do so. How can one believe in the "truth" of Jane, much less the "truth" of the hired US mouthpieces without proof?

American in NY, the Israelis are labouring under the misconception that they only get 3 billions a year in aid from the States and that this has to be spent in most part in the US on US arms to make their economy go round. In fact, Israel gets over 5 billion a year of which the frst 3 billion is paid by exception to Israel in a lump sum at the begining of the year so it can benefit from the interest on it; no other recipient country is favoured that way. In addition, the US guarantees Israel's annual loans of about 2 billions for the arms purchasing which since the inception of the loan guantee program have always been converted into outright grants to Israel as an added annual gift. Israel is the only country in the world that is granted the status of being a tax-free haven for US contributions of 1.5 billions a year as are the purchase of Israeli bonds for about 500 million a year and this to the world's 16th richest country. This is a heck of a lot of annual help.

Even if Mr A would like to wipe Israel off the map.. whats so bad about that? Every liberal worth anything foamed at the mouth for the destruction of the evil white empire we called south africa, now jews perpetrate the same injustices ( a FENCE they call it ...shit! nifty looking fence!)Why shouldnt the world work towards the dismantling of the racist, apartheid state of Israel( separate roads for separate races! even the horrible south africans didnt think up that one)

Ahmadinejad speaking at a university does not alter threat levels, does it? Surely, the shrill condemnation is music to his ears, implying that Jews are running scared. Why not go to his talk, then in question time, see how he responds to a grilling - polite, reasoned questions are going to be far more effective at attacking his zeal than de facto censorship. For heaven's sake, you guys, he's not in a position in the US university to do what Hitler did - he's out of his environment. People who compare the two situations are out out their tree. Go get him folks - opportunities like this are too rare to miss.

It seems that Jewish web-sites get disproportionate anti-Jewish bloggers. Are there no red-neck, islamist, and liberal bleeding heart web-sites where they can express themselves? Is it possible that this is a strategy of these deep thinkers.

Yes we're like that Edith, all of us. Jews are very strange, indeed, unlike real human beings.

I love that.. letting someone speak his mind is a perversion of free speech! Fantastic double talk.. straight out of 1984. Keep it up jews! You only do yourselves a disservice supporting the thought police at the ADL.By the way why should paranoid jews dictate moral standards to the rest of Americans? CHUTZPAH!!@!!I really think that the internet has made possible a world wide awakening on the subject of free speech and the jews who have feared it for so long. Why would anyone fear what any other had to say if it were not at least partially true? I FEAR NO WORDS! if you dont like it then TURN AWAY THY SEMITIC EARS and let the rest of us continue our long overdue awakening concerning the extensive crimes and misdeeds of the chosen ones! Rubio

Your idea of freedom of speech, sound like the American talking to an Iranian and telling him that he could berate all he wanted against Bush in front of the White House and no harm would come his way, big deal says the Iranian, I could go to the presidential palace in Teheran and berate all I want against Bush, and no harm will come my way. People like you are so blind of hatred against Israel and Jews, that no matter what, do not see the mindset that has brought Muslim and Arab societies to a state of disaray and backwardness to a point of despair in spite of the fabulous wealth that oil has brought to those societies, but is dilapidated due to unmitigated corruption of that societies so called goverments, until those societies look inward toward their own shortcomings, they will remain in their very sorry state.As for you. Mr. FOOL ON A CLICK, rid yourself of your hatred, and take your societies with you

Is the reason ahmadinejad can not speak, that bush and new york do not want anyone else in on their propaganda cow ?

Lynn, I know that Ahmadinejad does not really care for Arabs but he does care in his funny way for other Moslems and this is why I'm saying he would not risk killing them because 1.5 billion other Moslems in the world would not let him get away with it. I find it regrettable that your vocabulary is taking a wrong turn and is now sounding like that of the haters, especially your unkind reference to Ahmadinejad being a little monkey. It did not add anything of quality to your comment but served only to depreciate it and put you in the class of the screamers.

Yosemite, no offense to you was intended but it was aimed at those rare Jewish posters who at times are more vicious toward other Jews than to Arabs. If I mentioned Sharon's infamous walk that deliberately lit the tinderbox of the intifada that needed only a spark to bring it to life, Jews would simply grunt and change the subject but when the comment comes from one such as you, he needs to wear protective armor. This is what was meant by my sarcastic remark about watching your back.

He ain't got no strategy. I'll never step foot in a Reform Temple again! So help me God!

Mark, you are thinking in strictly military terms. Wrong way to think here, and I was hoping to make it clear to Walid (twice), but you need to follow the thought. 1. One bomb in Israel will destroy only the Tel Aviv area. Then, Jewish fears kick in. The Jews realize that Israel does not provide safety, but rather danger. Result: A large and growing emigration out of the country. Jews are used to be wanderers. You have to think like a Jew. 2. Iran, or any other country will not strike Israel in the open. The way it might happen is by an unknown ship, operated by terrorists, exploding in the Tel Aviv Marina. Whether it is later found out who did it and who provided the bomb is immaterial. The damage will be done. Conclusion: Any nuclear bomb in any Islamic country (beginning with Pakistan) is extremely dangerous for Israel.

Let the ignorant and malicious man speak, the students will make minced meat of his ideas.

Here you are quoting the same al-Jazeera English, that we cannot get on Cable in the USA because various lobbies have deemed it supportive of terrorists and misrepresentative of facts. And, in an argument about freedom of speech. Now, that is ironic.

I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. Old American saying.

When LeMay tried to get Ike to nuke the Russians before they had a chance to nuke us, Ike replied that he was certain the men running Russia had worked hard to be there and didn't want to stop existing.

"One bomb in the Tel Aviv area will hit mostly Jews (with some Arabs in Yaffo, but will not pulverize Jerusalem. Moreover, after such a calamity, one would expect the rest of the surviving Jews to realize that Israel was too dangerous for their survival, and to move out. That would put an end to the state as it is." - Tosefta Twaddle. Aircraft would launch from two bases which would not be seriously affected, missiles would launch from other locations which likewise would not be affected. The largest cities in Iran and all of it's major military installations would be vaporized. Got it? I am certain the men running Iran understand this.

YES, OUR TAX DOLLARS!! Who the hell pays for the security of the little monkey when he travels?

Tosefta, a single atomic bomb could do great harm to Israel, but it simply could NOT destroy the nation. Though I do not share the more exaggerated assessments of the Israeli nuclear arsenal, I can assure you that the arsenal which does exist would be capable of doing far more harm to an aggressor (Iran) than a single atomic weapon could achieve. Thus the ONLY thing that Iran could achieve by gaining atomic weapons would be deterrence, Iran does not actually need that, for the simple reason that ANY nation which used atomic weapons against any which did not have them would become an instant international pariah. Which is EXACTLY why Israel's current government does not nuke Iran.

"Israel would disappear without our tax dollars as well." - American in NY Twaddle. Israel would purchase fewer American weapons and that is all.

Another news agency that reported/translated Ahmadinejad's speech as calling for Israel to be wiped off the map was Al Jazeera English. The headline of the article was: "Ahmadinejad: Wipe Israel Off Map," with the lead sentence of that article: "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has openly called for Israel to be wiped off the map." http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveID=15816

I didnt know NEW YORK CITY was known as Meir Kahane city. I thought he was murdered there. Thanks for corecting me you Jew hater. Lets see this get printed.

interview in Tehran,where he fielded questions from the reporter graciously .Next,the UN speech where he will once again speak soberly,with dignity.And the Columbia event,where some of the faculty(and students) are supposed to ask the'tough' questions.Hard to get past his balance and poise.I wish them luck!

Once we had Hanoi Jane. Now it's Hanoi Columbia.

I just looked up Genghis on the internet and it said that 1/5 of the world are his descendants. The bloggers were funny on that article and said 1. he was busy 2. something about the mailman. If you are in a mood for humor. N. American Indians and mongols did practice shamanism, etc. and were similar, maybe also in genetics.

What should I have said? They are related genetically? Indians came from the lands of China.

I have not heard 1 argument against this man speaking at UN. You can call Jews what ever you want we will survive. Will you answer me why in G-Ds name should we invite him to talk at a University. This man suplies weapons thatare killing our children, I forgot yiu may come from a culture that beleves killing children is a honor.

(Lynn) His nerve would diminish if he wasn`t protected to the hilt with your tax dollars. Israel would disappear without our tax dollars as well. Iran doesn?t receive any.

just focus on all the funds that will be withdrawn from Columbia by this little fiasco they have planned. A lot of Jewish Alumni out of Columbia.

it's in my nature.

Why not 100th generation? Are you native or what!

Key to this event will be the format. He should be allowed to speak for a set time. Then an equal set time should be allotted for short pointed questions, with a limit of say five minutes for his answers. The questions must be vetted for maximum impact, otherwise it'll all be a waste of time, like one of his staged 60 Minutes 'interviews' on CBS.

We know no how stupid your idea would have been if implemented with Hitler during the late '20s. Would you have suggested: "Let him speak all he wants?" He did, and rallied the masses against us, because antisemitism is lurking underneath collective consciousness. The world was and continues to be too stupid and bland for it, Bradley Burston. Or haven't you heard of such a thing called antisemitism?

You admire him? You must be suffering greatly from a lack of something--maybe common sense, at least. Your are right saying he has nerve--but that of a fool. He has a fool's message, too: "A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." And, yes, a fool is as a fool does. It appears, too, that you share his chutzpah!

Among the anti-Israel posters, you seem to be the most reasonable. Your rejoinder to Natallie Durson's post regarding her characterization of NYC for example, demonstrated some independent thinking which is absent from some of the other 'critics' on this blog. Thats why I'm a little surprised at your first post in which you paint us Jews as paranoid regarding Ahmadinjhad. I do see how you recognize that his lack of clarification regarding his remarks indicates something of his intent. Certainly the acquisition of all those centrifuges would also qualify. Given that regime's support for extra-national armed groups, certainly you can understand my people's concern, nu?

You can say anything about Israel in this great country and you know it. You do not have any difficulty in posting. You have no difficulty posting your negetaive feeels and delight when a bus is blown up. Do you dance with Joy when the report comes in about another death caused by the ammuntion sent by Iran to kill. How about showing some feelings or are you

I hadn't really thought of that one, it certainly is a good point. Honestly, I was against the idea of him speaking here in my hometown, but your column does present another side that does have its relevancy.

Some time ago I wrote I loved the writer of some article. Is this the same author? I have had that with Jews several times. One minute I love them, the next I don't recognize them any-more. I have to think very deeply about this.

Many moons ago, a fundamentalist Christian gave a lunchtime lecture giving his "proof" that the world - and the universe - had existed for only 6000 years. It was brave of him to do so in a Scientific Research organisation, but he was treated politely, his "proof" debated and gently debunked with counter arguments. It was a bit like a debating society, where one side may have to argue against their own convictions, and I agree that letting Ahmadinejad speak is far better than showing the intolerance that he displays; that is a great show of moral strength on the part of the university.

The natives have been in North and South America for tens of thousands of years. Khan's descendants aren't even 1,000 years old.

"This could very well be the death knell of the Iranian bid for a seat on the UNSC." I'm glad you've discovered a positive to the negative.

Sir, It will be very difficult to find a place for a humans between T-A and Afganistan. Of course pious Jew like you would find better explanation why it is can not happen. :))

To all you brainless wonders out there who keep complaining that according to most it is only freedom of speech "unless it involves criticism of America or Israel." I say to you this, freedom of speech is acceptable even when it criticizes the US or Israel but what this moron does goes beyond that. Last time I checked calling for Israel to be wiped off the planet is not criticism. Last time I checked denying the Holocaust existed though accepted by the civilized world whether they are friends of Israel's or not is also not criticism. Go ahead and criticize all you want because ulike in Iran, we live in countries where freedom of speech is accepted as long as it doesn't go beyond that to things such as incitement to kill, etc.

Sir, A---d is not subject of Constitution. Foxman is and therefore enjoys freedom of speech. You, Columbia U, and liquor shop across the street may invite A---d as a private guest and he can attend if he has a valid visa. American in NY ?????

Like most megalomaniacs, Ahmedinajad thrives on PUBLICITY. Getting a chance to speak at Columbia has absolutely no bearing on any freedom of speech issue. In the U.S., the right to freedom of speech is accorded only to U.S. citizens, and was intended to prevent individuals' rights from being trampled by their own government. Ahmedinajad is not a U.S. citizen, and he's not an individual like you or I. He's virtually a government unto himself, and has appropriated enough power to suppress all freedom of speech in Iran (ask anyone who's fled Iran what happens to people who challenge him). The essential hypocrisy of Columbia, then, is that under the banner of "freedom of speech", it gives a platform to someone whose actions demonstate complete disregard for it. This man will continue to do Israel a public relations favour no matter where he speaks. Lots of places will afford Ahmedinajad a platform. There's no reason for Columbia to do so.

I see you didn't deny Jane's truthful comments on Iran's participation in the murder of US troops.

So you support placards of photos of Mohammad having sex with little boys up on stage with Ahmadinejad, all in the name of "free speech"?

The people who drove their planes into the World Trade Center, were Saudis, all 19 of them. Perhaps if Mr. Ahmedinejad were to visit and lay a wreath, he would comprehend something. I know he would not be ready to visit Yad Vashem, since he feels it is because of Israel that Iran is being held back with its nuclear program, and he sees an unfairness in that. Well and good. As for speaking in front of Columbia University students, it would be up to them to pick his brain, and see what answers they would get. If anything, at least they would be able to form an opinion for themselves, whether he makes any sense or not.

Tosefta Why change the subject? Unless it was relevant to a response to Walid... Must away on to the other forum which is more important as far as I can gsther,and missed quite a bit while posting here. Off I go for a short time,but will be back. Why do you exaggerate the fear of Israel demize and bring in other factors?is it to really scare some who are not too perturbed at all. Just sow Ahmed briefly in the news saying:I don't want nuclear power.i will have to follow it further.But we still have to wait until his visit to the Cuniversity and its outcome versus the students who I hope will badger him and not be intimidated by that monkey face. Adios for the present You are my better half now. You know that don't you Judge?

for Mahmoud is the only reason he is coming to NY. His nerve would diminish if he wasn't protected to the hilt with your tax dollars.

If you think Ahmadinejad cares for anyone in the Arab world, you are seriously mistaken. And, there are a lot of people who live in fear besides the Palestinians who should not have to either. Most of the people who live in fear have Islamists to thank for it.

Snippet in the news,and there was Ahmed saying he does not want a nuclear power. Just that for the moment..

Yes, let him speak. Let him speak so to offer him the difference. In his country, people that think in a different way cannot speak. Why should the west act the same way the iranian regime does? So he will see that many people among those who ask him questions are using cloth according to their cultures and religions. Some will have turbans, some will wear crosses in necklaces and some, etc etcetera p.p.. Back home, he will instruct his "religion police" to inprision the guy that goes by with a cross in his neck, to deny women basic human rights or to get rid of government criticals by hung them in public, like sometime back in the middle age. So let him speak, for the ones that know the thruth will see once more what he is up to and the other ones that don't will wake up. When will the iranian people wake up? Lets hope very soon, 'cos there is something in the air that is not quite hopeful for them.

This time, an Atom Bomb instead of a Kalishkanov? A Koran instead of an Olive Branch?

at dealing with criticism either. Flipping out over cartoons, now really.

Walid, I tried to hint before how a single atomic bomb may put an end to Israel. One bomb in the Tel Aviv area will hit mostly Jews (with some Arabs in Yaffo, but will not pulverize Jerusalem. Moreover, after such a calamity, one would expect the rest of the surviving Jews to realize that Israel was too dangerous for their survival, and to move out. That would put an end to the state as it is. I also sympathize with the Palestinians. Thys should not have to live in fear, and the solution to this is some peace agreement. But the dangers are different. One should worry about both, but not assume they are of the same order.

Ahmadinejad for many reasons, not the least of which is his treatment of his own people, I do agree with you on this matter. This is not the first time we have had to put up with a lying piece of garbage and it won't be the last. This could very well be the death knell of the Iranian bid for a seat on the UNSC.

Citizen Zero, you should be worrying what will be coming next from the clone of Bush, your own Harper. I heard he isn't keen on free speech either, especially on his stalling on the Kyoto Protocol.

Preventing him from speaking shows your weakness. Allowing him to, shows your strength. I bet you Bush could quite freely go there and "do his thing".Ahmadinejad would be only to happy to give him a platform to embarrass the US, and he would.

Yosemite, you will end up being called a Jew-hater here because you have admitted that there was something behind Sharon's promenade with the 1000 policemen and this is a no-no admission. Watch your back.

I have read his denouncement of the deliberately mistranslated sentence somewhere: perhaps it was on his own blog site, or perhaps it was on the Angry Arab site. One can't expect a denial for words said in his mother tongue, and then translated into a completely different sentiment.

Tosefta, I recognize and respect that the Jews of Israel are nervous about comments being made about their destruction and I know it is not to be taken lightly. At the same time, I find it resentful that the same worried Jews are refusing to consider that there are a million and a half Muslims right in there with them that would also be hurt as well as another 4 or 5 million other ones within a stone's throw away and Islam's second or third most holy shrine would be puilverized and blowing all those away at the same time as killing the Jews just doesn't make sense. So there is something fishy about the threats being made but I can't make them out. I still find that having a whole country living in fear of extermination is not a very nice thing to do. But neither is wondering where the next missile from an Apache will be coming from for a Palestinian. Why is it unacceptable for an Israeli to live in fear but OK for a Palestinian?

Look at history, a good analogy would be a comparison with Nasser. Like Nasser wanted to run the arab world, Ahmadinejad wants to run the islamic world. Like Nasser he engages in and gets lost in extreme rhetoric about Israel's destruction or downfall. Nasser's problem was that believed his own rhetoric, so does Ahmadinejad. Nasser's rhetoric created the 1967 war, Ahmadinejad's will create the bombing of Iran. Nasser did not concieve of what he was going to get, neither does Ahmadinejad who thinks his shitty spare parts Iranian airplane and threats of extinction really match a technologically superior and millitarily advanced Israel. Since he is as smart as Nasser, Ahmadinejad is not afraid. Instead he should be very, very afraid. Does he think Americans accept his work in killing their soldiers? Does he think Israelis will allow their own Holocaust? While he can start terrorist acts unlike Nasser, he is also more likely to be joining Mohammed shortly than in destroying Israel.

Kath, I was not being discourteous but simply saying that some have a problem grasping certain concepts. If you understand that I'm trying to short-circuit the nuances left by Ahmadinejad and his refusals to answer questions about the destruction of Israel, then you should be smart enough to realize that I am not talking about you. However if you fail to grasp what I'm saying then you should not be offended as you wouldn't understand even if I explained. A case in point is Peter the fool; he failed to read that I was saying on how tired I am of seeing Ahmadinejad skate around and not answer the crucial question about Israel so in his simpleton manner, he wrote that I was an Arabist apologist defending the little guy from Iran. What else can an Arab be if not an Arabist; this is the example of stupidity I'm referring to. Puppy?

Israelis must improve on internal social justice and adopt empathy for all ordinary Palestinians. AN is a murderous incoherent confused apparatchnik in fake Islamic colors. His major crime is the oppression of Iran and the organized genocide of the Iraqi citizens. Columbia is bribed and has got a shameful political science department.

There is some confusion here. Ahmadinejad, and anyone else here in America has freedom of speech. What Foxman and others are attempting to do is prevent him from having the public attention that speaking at a prestigious university gives him. It is another example of the ADL attempting to control freedom of speech in America. It should be irrelevant to anyone where he speaks. What he says is what is important, and if it is outrageous or offensive, he will only make more people aware of it and discredit himself. The ADL needn?t waste its time. The ADL should be condemned for its not understanding the purpose of freedom of speech.

Kath, sorry it wasn't to me you had written but the sing songs are always the same anyway. You are right about Saudi Arabia being scared but you can include Egypt and Jordan with it that are terrified of the Islamists and Lebanon has just had a taste of what these guys can do. Still, this does not take away from the witch hunts I described and these usually are mostly always coming as a result of paranoia. Going after Finklestein with an elephant gun is nothing short of paranoia as was the brouhaha over the speaking engagement of Dany Rubenstein. The link I provided was to avoid having to post the 3 different sources of those hunts and not to drum up business for the forum as everybody here already knows it and either likes it or hates it.

It is an answer to my prayers that he is being given a forum from which to speak and take comments that have been pulled from a sensitive context and blown up to mean something he does not intend. I am not anti-semitic and neither am I blind to the tension between muslims and jews; nonetheless, the citiznes of the United States need to realize that the Jewish Nation in the United States exerts a lot (some would say too much) pull in international politics. And, I am also cognizant that this is a TWO WAY STREET IN TERMS OF RACIAL TENSIONS. I have many muslim friends who do not compare to the racism I have heard come from my Jewish friends. I understand what the Jewish people have gone through, but I also believe that the United States oft backward views on religion and what Jesus truly preached is fermenting an alliance with Jewish people that resonates hatred from the muslim world as descendants of Ishmael. This is almost fantasy - but it is what is happening.

the few times Ahmadinejad was interviewed by Western journalists, he did nothing but snake around the issues. If professional journalists can't corner this guy and make him speak directly and truthfully, then how do expect college students to manage this feat? Yes, I say let him speak, if for no other reason than to show that America is a real democracy that allows freedom of speech, even for idiots like the Iranian imp. We can try him for crimes against humanity later, before he carries out his plans.

Here's the irony of the "free speech" argument: Those American citizens who attempt challenge the Iranian president will certainly be silenced.

I compare Ahmadinejad's visit to Sharon's going to visit on the top of Temple Mount. He knows what he is doing. He wants America to go to war with itself. Destroy itself from within. Because we do have useful college students that are such idiots that they would lie down in front of speeding trains rather than go to war. I'm Right! You're good at what you do. It's evil. But you do it well!

..is fine..ist amendment is great..but..this guy should not even be allowed into the country. The day before he left Tehran,he was threatening,blustering,chest pounding. He knows our system and is using it against us. He's laughing at the fact that he can threaten us and then come here as a guest. WE can be assured it wouldn't happen in Iran. Weakness is what he sees it as.

it was a snowy beautifull winter day. I was just driving to home from movie suddenly a car BUMMMMM to my car. car accident. than I looked at the driver. our Tali :) she said " Hi Atilla, Dear How are you ? I said " Hi Tali, I am fine :) than we took her car. we went a sinagogue. we got married. we are good in three years of our marrieage. than I met some other lady. TALI DIVORCED ME. She directly went to Ynet. She knew I hate Ynet. She started to write there. I went there a poster. anyway ! haartezzzzz what I write , man ? I hate you haaretz. YOU HAVE DESTROYED MY MORALITY. I CANT WRITE GOOD. NO BEER IN HOME. but tomorrow night ! I WİLL COME HOME WITH COLD BEERS AND I WILL START A WAR TO YOU, HAARETZ. Love uhh, sorry Hate :) Atilla Liman Karagözoğlu

Lets open the air waves.Let Arutz 7 finally have their radio station. Cancel government run tv. When there is real freedom in Israel , then lets talk about it for the rest of the world.

Gary E, I don't like the guy either but we must not try to muzzle him but the students should push him for clear answers on what he would do to the Jews of Israel. Hopefully the picture will become much clearer now especially that he doesn't have much room left to skate around in with Bush very much intent on bombing Iran.

No,Olmert and Barak could not and would not go to Gaza and give an anti-arab speach, for two important reasons: 1. They are both PRO arab 2. They would be murdered due to the lack of civilized norms in the Palestinian culture of death and barbarism.

That the paranoid A-job or his paranoid followers will take good care to keep the Jews out of the lecture hall and will shout down any questions that they don't like. Don't bet on getting any useful answers out of this trip.

"WE ARE HERE TO SERVE HUMANS." Remember that one? Yeah! Serve us on a plate.

Walid, I doubt that there is a fear of what Ahmadinejad would say. Read the Burston article and you will see what is expected. Fear by Israel of a nuclear Iran is legitimate. After all, as Rafsanjani said (which is true), one nuclear bomb in Israel will destroy the country. (Not true right away, but the surviving Jews would conclude that the country is not worth the risk.) You bring other incidents of American Jews trying to stifle debate on Israel. This happens to be true, as Walt and Mirsheimer indicate. What happens to Finkelstein may also be related.

He will use his powers. In his mind, he will be saying, "GO TO SLEEP! GO TO SLEEP! DISARM ISRAEL! DIE ISRAEL!" I hate useful liberal idiots. I'm not going. If Jewish Organizations demonstrate in LA, I will support them. HE TOOK AMERICANS HOSTAGE! NOW HE TAKES ALL AMERICA HOSTAGE! STAND UP BLACK PEOPLE! HE SHOOK THE HAND OF THE GRAND DRAGON OF THE KU KLUX KLAN! DOROTHY VANDERBILT ALIAS DAVID DUKE!

You think that most of us would find it too hard to grasp,how dare you!You presumptuous puppy..You need yourself to wisen up and no insults on some of us here thank you! Be a bit more humble and no further discourteousness from you from now on!

The question is whether this will be a real exchange of information, or just a PR opportunity for the Iranian agenda, mixed in with endless evasions and double-talk. Don't expect to hear the same statements--the real statements--that Ahmadinejad freely states within the safety of his own borders. Besides, such statements won't recruit willing converts to Iran's political cause.

Walid The mention of the aforesaid persons like Finkelstein(the fink)or Danny Rubinstein has nothing to do with what you debunked the paranoia.Truth as far as I understand.There is no paranoia at all! Let me tell you it is not so much Israel who is afraid,think more of Saudi Arabia for one,and the surrounding Gulf States for another. Israel can take care of its self.You are simply stirring the pot hoping you will get someone to visit your SS site. If I wrong you pardon me. Whether he comes up smelling like roses or not is irrelevant and no serious thinking people(at least the ones with a lucid brain)will endeavour to make him smell like roses. P/S Hey Walid,I think I had to respond to you verbatim on this subject before awhile ago. It rang a bell simply by the ?smelling of roses? Honestly I am certain., And obviously your response is a duplicate.(do you keep them tucked away in case)

Walid, I have to agree with you regarding the right to freedom of speech. President Ahmadinejad should be allowed to appear at Columbia University. This would be a good thing, as a direct exchange of information allows for all to hear directly from the Iranian President, as well as a direct exchange with those in attendance, hopefully without any questions being off limits. Although I am Jewish, and do not like or trust this man, he should be allowed to speak.

Jeff Isn't the point of this excercise for his visit? I mean to try and feel the waters and find out how he will fare.Problem is some deluded academics even some in the governement might fall under this illusion and think:Well,he doesn't sounds too bad really. That is where they will stumble and fall if they believe in this tricky fellow. He just wants,or thinks;He is preparing for his "Mahdi" to begin his domination of the infidel world. What I say,is this a joke too far.You are quite right in your assumptions here on some hopefuls in the forum whoever they are...

I find there to be nothing ambiguous in the remarks he has made concerning Israel. But even if such remarks were not explicit, they are definitely implied, and the meaning of such implied statements are readily understood by many in the Islamic world. Case in point, a Rwandan analogy. Hutus were incited to start their genocide of the Tutsis by the Hutu Power radio station imploring them to "go to work." The Hutus in Rwanda knew exactly what was meant and carried out the genocide of hundreds of thousands of Tutsis. When the meaning of such statements are fully understood by those they are aimed at, how can such statements be regarded as ambiguous?

Freedom of speech in the USA is a wonderful thing unless you happen to display a hangman's noose or a CSA battle flag. I doubt that the axle of evil will do either of those as he will be too busy waving his over-inflated ego.

Well Mr.John Makie(I presume)? If he decides to use his Quran and with intent on Dar-al-Harb which signifies the abode of war,not a vey incouraging way to endear himself to the Americans for sure. I do not think he will embark on such a contrversial subject.That he is visiting an infidel country(according to the Quran)than he has no business to be there in the first place. Tantamount to raise the heckles of the American nation as a whole,if he decides on the "taquiya"which ranslates in jihad(and deception)At least as far as I know. He/You have to think again....

This is not Rome, you are not caesar, and this is no betrayal of you.

Tosefta, it's no longer a matter of simple paranoia but something much more this time. It is appearing more and more that the Jews are really afraid that Ahmadinejad will adequately respond to questioning. They just don't want to give him any chance of coming out smelling roses. In the process, the Jews are giving off a lot of odors that are suspect. It began with the witch hunt on Finklestein at DuPaul U, followed by that on Dany Rubenstein of Haaretz at the New Israel Fund in UK for having used the A word about Israel, then Prof Nadia Abu El-Haj at Barnard for her work exposing false Judaic archeological history and the list goes on. We are lucky to have the Jewish Voice for Peace keeping tabs on the Jewish hate mongers and are not letting anyone muzzle them. Stories of the witch hunts at: http://shalom-salaam.net/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=1306&start=0&

I found this document to be quite helpful in exploring the possibility of charging Ahmadinejad with incitement to commit acts of Genocide, as is punishable by the Genocide Convention. http://www.gees.org/documentos/Documen-01896.pdf

Et tu, David?

Lakshmi, I was saying that it was not necessary to exaggerate anything about what would happen to Ahmadinejad at Columbia as the facts will speak for themselves. It's bad enough we have the village clowns like Peter jumping and errrming around with his finger up his nose without having Natallie join them in exaggerating the visit to Columbia. Most of the time I'm in agreement with what she says.

In the first place, the State Dept. should say NO to him entering America. His thugs are killing and maiming Americans in Iraq and shooting rockets at Israel. His country is sponsoring, training and arming the radicalism of Islamist-Jihadists in the region. And he has threatened to wipe out Israel. And they are feverishly working on their nukes to accomplish their evil goal. They have also threatened to fire their long-range missiles at American bases in Iraq and the region and at Israel. Despite all these, the idiots allowed him to enter the United States and allowed Columbia University to invite him to spread his propaganda? Where is the leadership in this country? Have they been hypnotized into the blind manipulations of Antisemites and Islamist-Jihadists? It is time patriotic Americans say NO to all these craps!

I also think it's dubious that some here question the legitimacy of MEMRI's translations, just because they expose the ugly side of the Arab and Islamic world. There are endless rhetorical games that are being played here, and issues of translation are cynically exploited, as you well know. I find it equally appalling that some people on here treat this man as a hero. While unsurprisingly they support his nuclear ambitions ("Isn't it hypocritical that Israel has nukes and Iran does not"), they like to try to bypass as much as possible the very real threatening nature of his statements. As I said before, he will probably tame his rhetoric here so as to appear to have been misrepresented. The hoped-for effect will be that gullible American academics will see him as a misunderstood underdog that is being bullied by big-bad America and Israel--and they will be more than happy to "forget" his statements which are incitements to commit acts of genocide.

He will sweet talk the US, UN, 60 Minutes Columbia and come out smelling like a rose. He will have his day. But, that is about it. He gets his day to blame Israel for all the worlds ills. Two days later it is back to reality for him. Sanctions will loom, his economy in trouble and he gets to deal with so many nations that fear a nuclear Iran, regardless of what he says on American soil.

Walid, I have to say, there has been something nagging at me about Ahmadinajad's speeches in the USA. He has been on 60 minutes here, and when asked to explain, he does tend to skirt the issue. It is unnerving. As my husband is Palestinian, and I a former research of Middle East politics, I do advocate Palestinian rights. But, there has been a nagging distrust of something missed. You just nailed it. Why not recant the mistranslations and say directly what is meant. Stop the rhetoric. At the same time, you have Israeli parties that have advocated Israel on both sides of the Jordan. Well, the implications for what will happen to the nations already there is unnerving. Saying things the right way does not make intentions any less ominous. Salaam

Are we collectively guilty of crimes? Usually, the person who ordered and did the crime and accomplices get prosecuted and you need evidence. Again, I am not a lawyer. The killers of Armenians 100 years ago are probably dead. How about the guy who killed Hrant Dink and the policemen who praised him and the singer celebrating his death. Should not they be prosecuted by the Turkish govt and people today. A judge just ruled in the favor of some American citizens against Iran. However, the problem for them is to collect the judgement from Iran. Again, I am not a lawyer. Just lay knowledge. It is harder than you think to prosecute criminals.

Actually, there is an argument for trying Ahmadinejad for incitement to commit acts of genocide, which is one of the crimes that is punishable by the Genocide Convention, and which can be applied to state governments, their leaders and to private individuals. This would apply to Ahmadinejad, whether or not he is a US citizen. Like you, I am a Jew who condemns genocide. I hate that the world stood by while Rwandan Tutsis were massacred en massse in relentless, inhuman acts of race-hate, and I think there were horrifying parallels between that and the Shoah. I also sponsor organizations' efforts to stop the genocide in Sudan. However, while I do support freedom of speech and think we need to uphold the values we proclaim to stand for and export overseas, I do think Ahmadinejad, who should be allowed to speak at Columbia, could conceivably be charged for crimes against humanity according to the articles of the Genocide Convention.

Boy, Bradley, you are making my life hard because I do not have a law degree. I would further conjecture that since the speech is a matter of controversy, the university could decide whether or not to invite him and could rescind the invitation under pressure. There is no really black and white but many opinions when it comes to issues of controversy. The only answer will come from the university, but all are free to send your letters to the university and to picket his arrival if he speaks.