Finals

Its finals week again. I have a whole day ahead of me studying corporate formation and insider trading. It is not exactly my favorite subject but because I have not been as diligent through the semester as I probably should have been, it is going to be a full day. The thing that is keeping me going at this point is the fact that I only have one more semester left. The bar exam is no longer this abstract event somewhere off in the future but something I need to think about and plan for, and graduate law school for--hence my motivation for actually learning business entities.

In the past, I have blogged a lot during finals, but when you have 15 weeks of derivative suit litigation to memorize, it leaves fewer time to blog away, but I will sneak in a few posts. Apropos blogging--guess who else blogs? Let me give you a hint: he's short, always wears a tan jacket, doesn't own a tie, and denies the holocaust. Yes, you're right! Its the Ahmadinejad blog. There are blogs of political dissent and advertising blogs and far too many law school blogs, but this one falls into propoganda blogs. Its kind of interesting that he appears so excited to have a free forum to express his ideas when there is lots of documented suppression of political bloggers in Iran and censorship of the internet. (read more here and here). One of the rationalizations you hear for why censorship of the internet is good is that it keeps out western values that could corrupt the Iranian culture. I wonder if one of those western values is free speech.

Polite Society

This post is a continuation of my previous post regarding Ahmakillajoos' visit to Columbia. There is an AP article today discussing Iranian anger at Bollinger's (Columbia University president) introductory comments at the speech. He writes:

While Ahmadinejad probably expected at worst a hostile grilling by the audience, Bollinger's sardonic comments reflected a blatant disregard for the tradition of hospitality revered in the Middle East.

Personally, I though Bollinger's comments were great, accurate, appropriate, and reflective of the American spirit of saying things like they are. Why should we display the showy, fake flattery that is being called hospitality but is really a way of masking brutal atrocities and the suppression of political dissent in Iran. It was obvious to anyone who watched that when Ahmakillajoos was asked if he desired the destruction of Israel that his answer was not honest and contradicted previous comments. He didn't actually answer the question even when confronted. One thing I like about American culture is our brazen willingness to confront people and challenge them on their positions. This is something that lands people in jail in Iran. I prefer the tradition of free confrontation to the tradition of hospitality that is nothing but show.

Adolfmadinejad

I just watched the speech by achmyrimjoberdo at Columbia University. The segment where he states there are no homosexuals in Iran is hilarious and I am glad he was laughed at vociferously. I originally thought it was a bad idea to have him come speak, and I still think it is kind of stupid to let him make a propoganda film out of a visit to America, but after seeing that he was publicly humiliated and made to look like an ignorant fool, I think there might be a positive effect to his visit.

But before I say what I think was good about his speech, I should say that this speech was not about the First Amendment. Because this is a legal blog, I should make some attempt to make a legal point. The First Amendment does not say that we have to give a platform for all views. It simply protects someone who expresses views that may be contrary. Almost all of what we consider the fundamental rights are less positive rights than negative restrictions on what the government can do to you as an individual. So his speaking at Columbia has nothing to do with a First Amendment right, except that he was not arrested for what he said.

But what he said was both extreme and dangerous. The best thing that might have come from the speech is that more people will realize what a crazy tyrant Adolfmadinejad really is. He denies the holocaust on the basis of needing academic freedom, he denied well documented torture and killing of homosexuals and women by claiming that homosexuals don't exist in Iran and that woman are beautiful creatures, and that the moderator was insulting him because he asked the simple question of whether he believed Israel should be wiped off the map (which he ha said many times in the past but avoided today by talking about the plight of Palestine.)

Basically, after watching that speech, I have the following question. . .would you rather have America trying to establish order in Iraq or this guy?