MALAYSIAN PM MAHATHIR MOHAMAD, a self-proclaimed anti-Semite, is slated to speak at Columbia U. in New York.
United with Israel questioned Why is one of America’s most esteemed universities giving a platform to someone who spews hatred of Jews and discriminates against the state of Israel?
YOU MAY SEARCH THE WWW — using almost any search engine — to read about Mahathir Mohamad’s bigotry. Bear in mind the man is in his 90s and, based on a 2018 rambling address to the UN, is losing his facilities.
THE QUESTION
Should a self-proclaimed bigot have the right to attack a people or a country?
In the U.S. free speech is highly treasured. Almost anyone can say anything short of yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater.
However, free speech must be tempered by hearing opposing views.
Unlike the current political climate where leftists shout down dissenting opinions,
IF the Malaysian’s presentation at Columbia is part of a debate, if his talk can be challenged in a civilized manner, then the visitor should be allowed his time to talk, regardless if his words are honest and factual.
Most bigots’ words lack a basis in fact; they lack first hand knowledge of what they speak.
ON THE OTHER HAND
If voices of dissent, of opposing viewpoints are silenced, then “freedom of speech” is violated. If it is violated for some, it must be violated for all. It is incumbent upon Columbia U. to assure, by any means legally available, that dissenters have time to civilly challenge any speakers’ pronouncements, and to assure that this privilege is protected.
RESPONSIBILITY
Freedom of speech carries with it responsibilities.
The speaker must be prepared to defend his or her positions.
The speaker must be prepared to listen to opposing points of view.
The hosting organization must be prepared to protect the speaker and the speaker’s right to address an audience.
The hosting organization must assure that people with opposing views are accommodated providing their views are presented in a civil manner.
LESSON FROM CHILDHOOD
As a child I learned that it is “not WHAT is said but HOW it is said” that can make or break communication.
Admittedly I don’t always think of that when someone angers me, but I make an effort.
I also know that it is the speaker’s obligation to assure the listener understands, comprehends, what the speaker is attempting to convey.
I have tried to emphasize one word throughout this effort: CIVILITY.
I have seen too many speakers drowned out by protesters and too many challenges drowned out by those who support the speaker.
PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.
Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.
