I think you meant to surpress minorities.
surpressing whites is what we should do regardless.
I think you meant to surpress minorities.
surpressing whites is what we should do regardless.
sick of it wrote:
it's just a bunch of liberal east coasters who want the world to think they are above everything and soooo free minded....look at me...i'm cool because i am sooo liberal...give me a break.
If we're going to force democracy down everyone's throat how can we deny them freedom of speech?
Not all National Zionists are Jews. W. Bush, Cheney, Hillary Clinton are Christians and support National Zionism. Jimmy Carter is a Christian who is very critical of National Zionism. Likewise not all Jews are National Zionists, Noam Chomsky, many others, are Jews who do not support National Zionism. Simply labelling people does not encourage dialogue.
Until we can discuss the issues, there will be no re-conciliation bewteen warring cousins, no re-unification of Palestine, and no peace in Palestine. Look at the news. Israel just did an air-strike in Syria. Syria responded by assasinating Antoine Ghanem. I hope Hizb Allah will not execute the IDF war criminals Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev.
There are many rumors of short range tactical nuclear weapons being positioned around the National Zionist occupied areas of Palestine. I hope Blair can bring peace, before Haifa and Tel Aviv are nuked. This is getting out of hand. It is not what Allah wants.
Defense wrote:
Simply labelling people does not encourage dialogue... I hope Hizb Allah will not execute the IDF war criminals Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev.
I'm sure the irony of this statement is lost on you.
That said, if there is some sort of dialogue you would like to encourage, feel free to actually bring up a salient point.
Or you can just continue to spew vitriolic filth. The choice is yours.
When has the last time Columbia had a general or other militiary official give a speech on its campus? It seems dishonest to say this is about free speech when Columbia's past history doesn't allow for all speech on its campus.
The Iranian president could speak his mind in public while in New York (security permiting). That is different than inviting him to speak on a college campus. When a college invites someone to speak on the campus, it is a honor. It isn't a free speech.
I am all for controversial Americans to be invited to speak on college campuses. That would be a good venue to exchange ideas. That is very different than a inviting a leader of a country whose country supports terrorists groups.
Your'e sick. Hizb Allah should not kill IDF war criminals Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. They should exchange them for prisoners of war and political prisoners held by the temporary National Zionist occupiers in Palestine. People have families and loved ones who want to see them. Have Mercy.
I'm glad to see that at least some Columbia students are protesting the university's decision to allow the Iranian president to speak there.
I'm speachless.
worst. translator. ever.
worst. translator. ever.
defense reads like a troll. He probably knows the subject matter but distorts it on purpose to try to get some attention.
Sounds like the Columbia U President slammed the Iranian Pres. pretty good in introducing him.
I wonder if that was his plan all along
The CU President slammed him!
americans are f'en halerious! freedom of speech, freedom of information, freedom of rights...oh, but only for some of you. yeah good ol' "free" america! lol. the hypocrisy is hysterical.
If there will be Q&A afterwards then I'm all for it.
Conservatives always seem to be afraid of dialog. Who cares? Fu\ck 'em.
confused Kiwi wrote:
americans are f'en halerious! freedom of speech, freedom of information, freedom of rights...oh, but only for some of you. yeah good ol' "free" america! lol. the hypocrisy is hysterical.
Please explain who is being denied any of those freedoms in this instance.
I think the previous poster is refering to the majority of on this thread who seem to think freedom of speech is reserved for some and not all.
Why do kiwis think the sun shines out of thier ass?
ahmadinejad is right really, i mean, with the idea that the CU president doesn't need to bring up all these points before his speech. He's biasing the audience before the invited speaker even begins. If the audience disagrees, let them disagree as they hear the speech, or after the speech, not before it. It seems hypocritical to discolor Ahmadinejad's speech before he even gives it. The CU president can assume that, because he IS speaking in front of an intelligent, educated audience, that they know all the points he's brought up against Ahmadinejad, and all he does is further inflame the audience.
ranter wrote:
I think the previous poster is refering to the majority of on this thread who seem to think freedom of speech is reserved for some and not all.
Please provide multiple examples that demonstrate the majority of posters on this thread think that.