Controversial world leaders poisening the mind of our students..., oh no! Options

[Melissa]

So this discussion/debate is stemmed from an extremely controversial event (at my college, at least) when President Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, was invited to speak at Columbia University. Parents, alumni, prominent leaders, reporters, etc. all had something to say - many of which were very negative - and tons of people pulled funding (listening to alumni bitch at us over the phone was not a pleasant task). I had the chance to listen to him speak and have to admit that he's an incredibly intelligent man (which is scary because I think he's a bit crazy), and while he said many things that might cause some outrage (i.e. "there are no homosexuals in Iran" - look the event up if you're interested, etc), that's not the point of this debate.

I really don't care if you agree/disagree with Pres. Ahmadinejad, I'm wondering if you think that it is a positive or negative thing to have such a controversial figurehead speak at an American university. People opposed to the event have said that there is no good outcome and think he should be banned from even landing on American soil. They say that such a smart man like him would only succeed in poisoning the minds of students.

The other side of the argument is that the only way to understand someone under such scrutiny is to listen to him and hear him out. Chris Colombo, our dean, claimed that if Adolf Hitler was alive, he would invite him to come over and explain himself. Wouldn't it be interesting to hear what he said? Hear him say why he did what he did?

So, what's your side of the argument? Should figureheads such as Saddam Hussein, Ahmadinejad, or Hitler be allowed to speak to at universities? Or should they just be completely ignored?

[illriginal]

So this discussion/debate is stemmed from an extremely controversial event (at my college, at least) when President Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, was invited to speak at Columbia University. Parents, alumni, prominent leaders, reporters, etc. all had something to say - many of which were very negative - and tons of people pulled funding (listening to alumni bitch at us over the phone was not a pleasant task). I had the chance to listen to him speak and have to admit that he's an incredibly intelligent man (which is scary because I think he's a bit crazy), and while he said many things that might cause some outrage (i.e. "there are no homosexuals in Iran" - look the event up if you're interested, etc), that's not the point of this debate.

Supposedly it's true. No homosexuals exist in Iran.

I really don't care if you agree/disagree with Pres. Ahmadinejad, I'm wondering if you think that it is a positive or negative thing to have such a controversial figurehead speak at an American university. People opposed to the event have said that there is no good outcome and think he should be banned from even landing on American soil. They say that such a smart man like him would only succeed in poisoning the minds of students.

Maybe we as humans should take the time to fully understand world leaders and what their agendas are. Maybe while America or most of the Western side of the world portray him as evil and insane the true nature of this man could actually be fair and righteous. Not that I'm sayin he is or isn't.

How could he poison the minds of others? Is he known to force his views on others outside of Iran in the first place? Who are they? Catholics? Right wing? Liberals? President Bush? Who?

The other side of the argument is that the only way to understand someone under such scrutiny is to listen to him and hear him out. Chris Colombo, our dean, claimed that if Adolf Hitler was alive, he would invite him to come over and explain himself. Wouldn't it be interesting to hear what he said? Hear him say why he did what he did?

This is the point of humanity and God has said so; we should learn of self, beasts (animals), and brothers & sisters (other humans). Also I'm a strong believer of; "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Why? Because one who hasn't sinned has a pure heart and mind, he/she would be able to recognize and judge legitimately. I would have to agree... give him his time to explain himself, he's man enough to show that he has no hate for Americans, that's not his nature. He wants to show that Islam is not everything that has been said about in the media and other westernized organized religions. We must be just and let him speak his nature... he's not gonna come here and try to poison the youth, please.

So, what's your side of the argument? Should figureheads such as Saddam Hussein, Ahmadinejad, or Hitler be allowed to speak to at universities? Or should they just be completely ignored?

Yes.... while Saddam was a tad messed in his head which I would admit is sort of not his fault because of his youth and all the shit he went through which caused to build this f**ked up hatred towards his own people, Saddam didn't have weapons of mass destruction, he wasn't given a fair trial, and for some really odd reason his lawyers were gettin assassinated... he was about to win the trial til' all his lawyers were killed. And to make it more comical, they said it was the terrorists (which could be true... American terrorists that is) who killed off his lawyers lol... for f**k sake people are stupid.

Anyways, only communication, only idea we have of world leaders is the media. Do you know how easily a video or a statement can be modified? Can be taken out of contexts? Shit people take religious texts out of contexts... even the Quran for goodness sake, and the Quran is as accurate and literal as it can possibly be, and on top of that.. the companion of the Quran (Hadiths) make it even MORE literal and breaks the Quran down into laymens terms, yet people who are filled with ignorance, hatred, and fear still take things out of context and poison their own children, friends, and the rest of their communities with their own fake ass imagination.