Wednesday, September 26, 2007
This was not an invitation to embrace freedom of speech. It was a propaganda campaign organized by Mr. Bollinger and co. - one which they lost to Ahmadinejad. How can the president of a famous university be so “astonishingly uneducated” as to take it upon himself to dictate to his audience what to think of his guest? Is this freedom of thought, common courtsey? Rather than insulting a nation by insulting its elected president, Mr. Bollinger should take a look at his own president right at home.
Although Ahmadinejad (AJad) is no saint, he managed to score some very good points. He stayed composed in the face of childish insults from Bolwinkel:),he made some very good points on hypocrisy of US with regards to terrorits & Nuclear issue. As he pointed out, US has designated the MEK as a terrorist organization yet it harbors them in Iraq because they serve its purpose. AJad’s speech showed the hypocrisy of the West and media that were trying so hard to discredit him by spinning the outcome!
Hugh Hewitt--right again. (Although the page I read had some good sense mixed in with the morally blind).
I think that you can't play the BBC both ways. Time and time again in this blog, I have read excoriating comments, mostly desrved maybe completely deserved, about nonsensical positions taken by the BBC.
Now that the BBC takes another nonsensical position, instead of excoriating it as has happened b/f, you take the position that Columbia allowing that jackanapes Ahmadinejad the opportunity to speak, where he largely looked silly, was not a good idea b/c the BBC thought he was the one making points.
I'm thinking the point is really about the 31 pages of posted support for the jackapes.....not really the Beeb itself.