Iranian leader 'petty, cruel dictator,' school president says

[democratic]

Source: CNN

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Columbia University President Lee Bollinger excoriated Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday, going through a long list of documented actions and remarks by the firebrand Iranian leader and his government.
art.

"Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," Bollinger said to applause from many of the 600 people in the room for a speech from the Iranian leader.

The Iranian leader has made statements in the past suggesting that Israel be politically "wiped off the map," though he insists that can be accomplished without violence. See some of Ahmadinejad's controversial remarks »

While he would not respond with a "yes" or "no" when asked Monday if he sought the destruction of Israel, he said the status of Israel should be determined by a free election.



Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/24/us.iran/index.html

[Bicoastal]

1. Aaah! Someone's being rude!

Freedom of speech my ass--why doesn't somebody taser the dean already....

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[subsuelo]

46. well, that depends

on whether I agree with him or not...

:sarcasm:

[no_hypocrisy]

2. But I want you kids to keep an open mind when you listen to him . . .

[JeanGrey]

62. I especially loved the "we have no homosexushuls here, not sure how

you got that idea"

:rofl:

[CreekDog]

80. like open mind when he says the Holocaust didn't happen?

Don't be so open-minded that your brains fall out.

[thoughtanarchist]

3. We should start calling him Condi-dinejad

He's more like a secretary of state than a president as we know it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Government_and_politics

[Little Star]

4. President Lee Bollinger's tirade

was just that a tirade. He needs to add some diplomacy in his rigid mind. His tirade was unacceptable and unnecessary.

[muryan]

5. I'm sorry, should the president have given him flowers and a blow job instead?

if the leader of a country who supports executing women and gays was right in front of me you can make damn sure thats the first thing id say. I applaud the way bollinger handled this visit. This is absolutely no reason why he shouldn't be allowed to speak in an open forum on US soil, however he better be damn ready to answer some questions. He danced around most of the important issues which shows that its really just empty rhetoric but he did pose a few important questions for the international community. Mostly about India and Israel not allowing IAEA weapon inspectors into their countries

[dave420]

9. He also had the right to blow rasberries at him and call him a doody-head

But because he's representing his school, he shouldn't have. It's about diplomacy, about not being rude to guests. Show some class, would you? No-one's saying he didn't have the right to be an ass. It's just not the most intelligent thing to do, especially as he ended up looking more childish than the Prez.

[Bicoastal]

12. He spoke his mind instead of cowtowing to decorum.

We usually praise that here at DU instead of decrying it.

Good for him.

[0007]

17. You're certainly are not speaking for this old timer here at DU

"We usually praise that here at DU instead of decrying it.

Good for him."

[Bicoastal]

21. Was MoveOn.org rude for doing what THEY did?

...they too criticized a political figurehead before he had a chance to speak. Most of DU, including me, applauded them then.

How was this any different?

[muryan]

25. because this guy has a beef with israel

and unfortunately so do many people on this forum

[liberalsoldier5]

36. Bingo!

So sad, pathetic, and embarassing indeed.

Go Bollinger!

[CreekDog]

81. He has a beef with the truth

As in the Holocaust, as in denial of homosexuality in his own country.

He should be openly mocked as should anyone that denies that Holocaust happened. I don't believe in equal time for lies.

[muryan]

84. i believe that he has the right to be heard

but also the right to be soundly criticized and mocked for his views. Like how the entire audience laughed at his comments on gays in iran, i wonder when the last time someone laughed at him during a speech.

[CreekDog]

85. Would you provide a forum for a man that denies the Holocaust happened?

Is that what constitutes "fairness"?

I'm glad he was confronted and mocked too, but I see no reason to give the stage to someone who lies so brazenly about such a major even in recent history. If a viewpoint is a lie, it doesn't have the standing in the interest of equal time.

[muryan]

100. sure i would

just as i would give forum to those who dont believe in evolution, or global warming. But they would be forced to answer tough questions on why they take such an extreme position against the facts

[CreekDog]

104. I wouldn't provide a microphone for someone to deny the Holocaust

They are welcome to speak where they can, but I'm not going to facilitate the spread of lies by providing a venue or a microphone --that makes me complicit if I know they are going to spread such lies.

[muryan]

106. but he looked foolish trying to sustain that point of view

he even fell back into saying that "it needs to be studied from a different perspective". thats a huge difference in straight out denial

[CreekDog]

108. backpedaling perhaps

I still don't think it was worthwhile to give him such a well publicized forum to peddle his "theories" (aka lies)

[dave420]

30. Don't speak for me

If others want to act like children, don't imply I'm one of them. If MoveOn.org acted in such a ridiculous fashion, then whoever spoke was just as much of an asshat as this guy was.

[pampango]

34. Truth to power. n/t

[dave420]

29. Do we fuck

No we don't. We praise people acting responsibly, as society, culture and responsibility dictate. He could have published a letter, breaking apart each and everyone one of Prez's spurious statements, after the fact. He could have acted like an adult. THAT'S what we praise here, not spouting off like a child.

[pampango]

38. MoveOn is pretty popular here for sticking it to Petraeus before he even spoke.

The ad could have waited til after his testimony and then picked it apart, but they went for the pretestimony blast. I actually agree with you that, in both cases, picking the speech apart would have been more effective.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pampango]

64. Thanks for the help. Sometimes I can't tell a talking point from

a logical comparison. Guess I should listen more carefully to Rush and the boys so I'll know what is off limits.

The gist of Petraeus' testimony was obvious ahead of time, but gist of Ahmadinejad's speech was just as predictable.

[dailykoff]

114. oops

wrong place, sorry

[krabigirl]

57. Then why invite him in the first place, if he was going to insult him?

I thought it came off as unbelievably rude, and it's an embarrassment!

[pampango]

65. At least Ahmadinejad did get a chance to speak.

Columbia invited Gilchrist last year and he didn't get that opportunity.

I agree with you that this was rude. If you are going to invite controversial speakers, you should give them a chance to present their views. Either make them stick around for questions or have a speakers with a differing opinion.

[muryan]

73. you invite him to make him answer those questions

you make him try to validate his absolutely insane stances on certain issues in the face of logic, facts, and reason. Show him the truth and make him face it unlike what happens in his country..

How many times do you think he has been asked about the plight of womens rights by the iranian media? This was too good of an opportunity to pass up and I'm damn glad bollinger handled it the way he did.

[Seabiscuit]

116. The president didn't want him to speak there. The regents over-ruled him, so

he threw a hissy-fit when he got ahold of the microphone.

[maseman]

6. I agree

I think MA of Iran is nuts and does pose a big threat to any human rights in Iran, but I believe the dean of Columbia was extremely over the line with his comments.

You don't invite someone to speak at your University and then rip them an ass before they speak. He can deliver a tirade anytime after the Iranian President speaks. I guarentee that if the roles were reversed and Shrubby went to speak at Iran they would not have treated him that way.

Of course he is too big a pussy to go there and speak to anyone.

[Bicoastal]

14. I betcha if the roles were reversed and W was in Iran...

...and the Dean of Tehran DID make a similar introduction, you wouldn't hear a word of complaint from this website.

Moveon.org and Andrew Meyer were applauded on DU for speaking the truth, even if it wasn't pretty--why should this Dean be any different?

[la la]

23. well, I'm thinkin'

Bollinger just wants off orally's *pinhead list*! Tonight, he'll be suddenly switched to the *patriot list*!!!

:wtf:

[nealmhughes]

59. The tirade was from Lee Bollinger, the President of the school, the dean was who got him there.

[Tempest]

8. Bollinger was trying to placate the protesters

He probably felt it was necessary so that he wouldn't be seen as the bad guy for having Ahmadinejad speak at Columbia.

The guy has no balls.

[dave420]

10. He could have just said

"Let's show him what freedom of speech means and hear him out, and debate what he has to say", instead of launching into him like some angry 8-year-old.

[LibDemAlways]

15. I'm with you. Don't invite him in the first place if you're

going to rip him a new one by way of introduction. And, once he's there, be mature enough to introduce him without resorting to petty insults. Made himself look like an ass.

[dave420]

31. Exactly.

It does nothing but make the host look like an ass.

[muryan]

74. he made himself look like a true academic to me

someone who wanted answer to questions, and thats exactly what he did.

[LibDemAlways]

90. He could ask for answers to questions without

resorting to name calling. He sounded bullying and unprofessional. Columbia is an Ivy League university. Ahmedinejad was an invited speaker. As with all invited speakers, he should have been introduced with civility or not invited at all.

[muryan]

102. when you introduce a speaker

you usually start with some of their accomplishments. I know when sandra day o'connor came to my school to speak, the introduction was about 10 minutes long about who she was and how she got there.

One of ahmedinejad's accomplishments is publicity executing women, children, and gays all for "crimes against islam." I think thats damn relevant to his speaking and probably the only reason why he was invited in the first place.

[FuJun]

37. Riiight...

How dare he be anything other than unflattering to a leader of a state who executes gay people and "apostates"

[Seabiscuit]

70. The regents should can his ass for that speech alone.

[muryan]

75. :-(

someone called out the jew hater. lets fire him!

[Seabiscuit]

97. Leave the demonizing of the Iranian president to the neocons and Liebermans

It was thoroughly inappropriate and shamefully undignified for the President of Columbia University to do so in a hateful, spiteful rant as a way of introducing the man to the audience.

Remember, that kind of behavior on the part of the administration and the press is what got us into Mess-o-potamia.:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1893588

[muryan]

101. criticizing someone with a horrible human rights record

is not some crazy right wing point of view. Apparently you dont mind the inequity that exists in his country for minorities like gays and women? i guess we should just give him a free pass on that because he doesnt like bush :sarcasm:

[Seabiscuit]

103. Allow him to trip himself up when he answers the questions.

That has absolutely nothing to do with a president of a major university demeaning himself in that disgraceful way.

And don't insult my intelligence with your ludicrous assumptions about me.

[muryan]

107. Much like you did with mine?

Look you think that the president should have performed fellatio on ahmedinejad while he was speaking. obviously i disagree

[Seabiscuit]

113. Not at all.

I think you're trying to give the president a rim job while fucking yourself in the arse with a dildo.

That's what I think.

Wrong again, Assumptio Imbicilicus.

And so I won't waste any more of my time reading your drivel, you just made "the list". Buh-bye - PING!

[CreekDog]

109. Yours is the worst type of comment

You agree with the substance of the University President's comments to the Iranian President, yet out of decorum, think they shouldn't have been uttered.

You would have a higher moral position if you thought those criticisms were invalid, but to think that they are true but should have been uttered at a different time out of respect is ridiculous.

[PittPoliSci]

76. he's not a diplomat.

he can say whatever he wants to someone he invited to his university.

[Cha]

7. How would he characterize our dic?

Petty? check, Cruel? Double Check.

[rodeodance]

11. He is all that.

[AllexxisF1]

13. Unfucking Believable

You invite the leader of another country to speak in an open forum and then you lambast him before he gets a chance to speak

WTF is wrong with you people. have you ever heard of civility and being diplomatic. There is NOT ONE GOD DAMN reason for the Dean to do the classless thing he did.

He could have left the insults to the students asking questions or other people. Yes everyone including me hate Amadenijad but Jesus H. Christ we can be civil.

How absolutely embarrassing in a time where literally war may be on our doorstep, some people in this country acted like a uneducated classless jokes.

Un****ing believable.

He is a guest in this country whether you like him or not and he deserves the same respect as any other leader. Respect the office not the man.

[Bicoastal]

16. That ONE GOD DAMN reason is the 1st ammendment.

No one has the right to get off easy in a public forum. Not our president, not the presidents of other countries, not anyone.

Ahmadenijad can handle himself--he's a big boy.

[AllexxisF1]

20. ...Bullshit.

This was not about some remark in a question and answer session. This was the Dean in his opening remarks slamming the guy He invited. You don't think that's a bit disrespectful and uncivil. Regardless what you think of the guy the Dean should have left the criticism to the students not himself in his opening remarks.

Incredibly bad form and in the worst taste.

[PittPoliSci]

87. what is bullshit is people lashing out at Bollinger.

Who cares about showing respect to some prick who thinks the Holocaust never happened?

FUCK THAT! He got what he deserved.

[Little Star]

98. Yes and as history PROVES

The Hatfields were right and the McCoys were wrong. That is clearly a settled issue!

I want to hear from all sides of this. Without the propaganda. Did anyone consider we have not been told ALL that led up to WWII. To much minutia missing and it is not a one sided issue, nor are the ramifications (ie: the Palestine's). WHAT exactly is wrong with people getting to question so called history? WHAT is wrong with anything? I just don't agree that ANY subject such as the Holocaust being studied until the end of eternity.

I guess the reason I feel like this, is I never trust what our own government wants us to believe. I also do NOT EVER believe in anything as just just Black and white or one sided.

It seems to me that just because one government hates another government, it doesn't mean that they hate the people of that country. History is useless until thousands of years have passed IMHO.

War is never good for anything. Fair dialog, dialog and debate is the only answer.

Yes, Amadinejad may not be right but maybe we are not either.

Please just explain what is wrong with seeing things through another lens? Who will it put into danger to re-examine any issue from a different perspective? There are ALWAYS two sides and those two sides should be listened to into eternity. Maybe we could all learn something.

Sharia law and homosexuality is just what their sharia law have brain washed upon the sheep. How long did the USA take to begin to grasp the rights of homosexuality? WE still can't combat the Black racism in this country. Our justice system still treat Blacks much worse than Whites. We have a such a looooong way to go, yet we expect muslims to completely change overnight.

[dave420]

32. No-one's saying he didn't have the right to spout off

But having a right to do something still doesn't mean it's OK, or in your best interests, to do that same thing. He ended up looking like a child.

[PittPoliSci]

88. He doesn't look like a child to me.

He looks like somebody who isn't afraid of backlash, and is willing to stick it to people who have it coming.

[Little Star]

24. Yep! n/t

[monktonman]

28. Respect the office not the man

Didnt I just see something like that said on Faux?
They were talking about the colledge newespaper that said fuck bush.
Neil Cavuto (what a dick) was all up in arms because these kids
disrespected the office of the president.
He was all cool with the freedom of speech deal (not really)
but boy was he hopping mad that anyone would disrespect our president.

Respect the office?? I think not. Irans president got what was coming to him
and like another poster says, Amadenijad is a big boy, he can handle
and insult or two.

[CreekDog]

83. I don't respect the office of the President of Iran

Sorry. Ooops, I mean get real.

[muryan]

77. respecting the office and not the man

is what has lead to the cluster fuck called the bush administration. if we respected the presidency regardless of the man occupying it, we might still be in vietnam.

[CreekDog]

82. Not for a damned Holocaust denier

What respect does he deserve? None. He took that position, it's patently wrong, it's used duplicitously against Israelis and it's a lie.

[martymar64]

99. Well then

We should be able to lambast the leaders of Israel and our own gov't (especially lieberman) for using the holocaust as an excuse to murder Arabs and persians. The holocaust was tragic but it's not a license to kill for israelis to use against palestinians. How many palestinians worked the showers at auschwitz and treblinka? none. That was done by Christians.
Now the israelis are engaging in their own version of ethnic cleansing and are setting their sights on nuking Iranians that never invaded anyone and people in the US just yawn. For shame.

[leftynyc]

95. Did Move On wait until Petraeus spoke?

No - because everyone knew what he was going to say. Why wait until a gay hater and holocaust denier speaks before confronting his pathetic lies? The madman from Iran never hid his feelings about these things. Good for the president of Columbia. While you are correct that he was a guest of Columbia - he probably thought he was going to get a free ride - he most certainly was not a guest of the US. The country was obligated under UN rules to let him in.

And as far as respecting the office - how many here respect the office of the President since Bush has been in office? I know I don't.

[jaysunb]

18. A "free " election would be bad for Israel....

There are quite a few non jews and peace loving Israelis that would change the dynamics if there were open elections.

[Little Star]

35. exactamundo! n/t

[SayWhatYo]

19. I have no problems with what he said, or how he said it.

I know if Bush went to a university in some other country and the president of the school criticized Bush, then I would not be be upset.... in fact I would support it 100%...

We better stop critcizing Bush too, right? I mean, we don't want to upset you dick-headed-leader supporters.

[AllexxisF1]

22. That go's for Bush as well.

If some University in England or France invites Little Boots to speak only to be lambasted by the people who invited him during their opening remarks I would be pissed to. It's a matter of decorum and no person doing the inviting should use that opportunity to insult anyone.

But by all means let the students tear him a new one but at least we can say that we were gracious and respectful hosts.

[1love]

27. You do know they still stone people for Adultery

in Iran. My values are not so transitory that I will condemn actions by my leaders but tolerate them in others. Wrong is wrong. Iran is wrong on many levels. The joy of freedom of speech is that you get to condemn those that you think practice awful things. I think stoning people for adultery is awful. How about you?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SayWhatYo]

41. I guess I do then... I guess you have a non-confrontational sheepish streak. :P

I mean that in a light hearted way. I'm not really being rude, sheep.

[yardwork]

71. Better rude than dead. I'd be executed in Iran for being gay.

[Prophet 451]

26. yes, yes, no; in that order

Petty, absolutely; cruel, certainly but since I gather he was elected by a majority of the popular vote and has not yet suspended elections, he isn't a dictator.

That said, inviting the guy and then slamming him in the introduction comes across as a set-up, like you've just invited him there to attack him. It would have been better to let him say his piece and then slam him.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[THUNDER HANDS]

40. maybe I'm missing a lot of stuff here

but I haven't seen anyone say they "like" him. Just that he shouldn't be treated disresectfully by the person who invited him to speak.

I mean, I've seen people throw praise at Hugo Chavez, but I haven't necessarily seen the same praise thrown towards this guy.

[SayWhatYo]

43. There were a few "he seems like a reasonable nice guy" posts on one of the recent threads...

I didn't detect any subtle sarcasm, but even without that I'm not 100% sure if they were not just baiting.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KAZ]

53. Yes, everyone on DU is insane. That's why you're here. n/t

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mc jazz]

42. Alexis gets it

The Iranian culture is middle east man, and even in America you can be insulted.
How dumb to piss this guy off
Luckily he didn't start tossing hand grendades into the audience
Nope, what we see here is him playing to the home crowd and appearing wise in the face of unjust treatment. This plays well in Arab street

This was political... glad the dean was the stooge not all the audiance and unbiased interviewers there. The real American people

My critique of 'jad so far is it's the same story of 911 and the Holocaust. I don't want to hear about it unless he tells us who HE thinks Al Queda is, but no it's the same ol' shit.
I want him to be grilled on Iran and Iranian influence there, and hope the guy doesn't fight when he doesn't have to

Cause this could get a whole lot worse
So piss the guy off, the douchebags behind this are responsible

Fuck that. I don't give two shits about either of them, I'm not taking sides or are you gonna start another war America?

[SayWhatYo]

44. huh?

[NeoConsSuck]

47. You tell 'em Bollinger!

because when we kill gays and blacks (Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, to name just a few), you can be damn sure it was done by red-blooded Murkans.

Not some rag-headed A-Rab.

Did Bush send you a lollipop after your outburst?

[subsuelo]

49. Bush? Or Olmert?

[Duffer29]

50. yo neo

you don't seem to understand, this guy wants YOU dead. he doesn't care about your politics. you are an infidel.
when anyons threatens to kill me, i take them at their word, i'd be stupid not to.

[mc jazz]

51. uhuh

is Arab TV is over this? yo momma.

If I owned a BS meter I'd be afraid to switch it on in case it couldn't handle the BS

[Duffer29]

54. jazz?

your tag line seems to be very desriptive judging by whatever it was you attempted to say

[Megahurtz]

66. Rofl!

:rofl:

[ButterflyBlood]

117. Where are the killers of Shephard and Byrd now?

Prison. Not remaining in the police force like the killers of gays in Iran.

Asinine analogy.

[Danger Mouse]

48. While I agree in spirit with what he said...

the fact that he used his introductory remarks to do that is in poor taste. I saw Ann Coulter speak when I went to JHU...if they had introducted her in such a way (cruel vindictive psycho asshole), I would've been offended. You don't INVITE someone to speak at your venue and then BASH THEM when you introduce them.
That being said, his tirade is just an appeasement because he was getting slammed for inviting the guy.
It reeks of placating people, and that makes it even more lame.

[Doctor_J]

56. He's just sucking up to the fascists that run this country

In DC and in the media. I hope the revolution comes in time for all the hate radio and cable "news" personalities to meet the endings that they deserve - something involving pitchforks

[cigsandcoffee]

60. By lambasting fascists from other countries?

Iran makes America look like Holland.

[Doctor_J]

68. then don't invite him over

Obviously when this tyrant was invited to speak, it wasn't to lambast him. That part was prompted by the 24/7 hate radio and cabal "news" onslaught. Whether he's right or not is immaterial. He was browbeaten into this by US fascists.

[muryan]

78. ok

:tinfoilhat:

the right wing of this country was wrong on the fact that he shouldn't be permitted to speak. they were right in the fact that he should be called out on the horrendous human rights record of his country. Just because they are usually on the opposite side of the argument doesn't meant they aren't right occasionally. we would all be better off if we remembered that

[Taverner]

58. Good

People need to realize hearing someone out and siding with them are two completely different things.

[Phrogman]

61. I think he's a pretty cool dictator too, and he's a lot smarter than our dictator...

But he's a pussy, our fearless leader's invaded 2 countries, what's this guy done to compare?

Huh?
Huh?
Huh?

[Megahurtz]

67. Excellent Point.

But the Iran-bashing Trolls on the thread will never acknowledge this. They're too busy whoopin' up hatred for Iran so that everyone will be able justify an illegal attack. Must be Cheney-Bots in action.

[muryan]

79. we all know our leaders were wrong for invading iraq

but that doesnt mean we should be in love with iran for killing gays and women. You seem to think that we should just all focus on one issue at a time. Thats not the world we live in, thats the world bush lives in and thats exactly why we are in the fucking mess we are in.

[Megahurtz]

111. Right.

That's why we shouldn't be focusing on Israel and giving them everything they want,
every time they want it.

[Phrogman]

112. The "one issue at a time" needs to be not getting into another war, OK?

Still in the process of losing the first 2.

[ButterflyBlood]

118. The point is we CAN focus on more than one issue at a time

And I have a tough time believing that some comments on DU attacking Iran over its treatment of gays and women will be the tipping point that results in an attack.

[leaninglib]

63. Duh...

:shrug:

[pettypace]

69. Bollingers opening remarks were terrible

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/07/09/lcbopeningremarks.html

I cannot believe he would address a leader of a nation with such denigrating language.

He should be ashamed of himself. No courage needed to give his spiel.

[blitzen]

72. Bollinger must be an idiot, since M. A. is by no means the most powerful leader in Iran

and simply does not qualify as a "dictator"

One would hope for less ignorance from a university prez

[entanglement]

86. Would Bollinger be so candid with any of our own fascists?

[PittPoliSci]

89. bollinger gets it.

the enemy of our "enemy" (bush) is still our enemy.

Ahmadinejad is still a creep, even though he's opposed to Bush. He is a disgusting, talking, pile of sleaze, and deserved what he got.

[lancer78]

91. I think the

president of the university was showing the crassness that got us into trouble in the ME in the first place. Before M.A. became Iran's PM Iran was becoming more pro-western. They even helped us fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. Then one day, the petulant child in the White House declared Iran as a part of the Axis of Evil. Shortly after, M.A. replaces the former moderate PM and we begin this long road downward. In order to clear up this mess, someone, someday, is going to have to grow up. All the president's tirade did was to reinforce the notion in the muslim world that americans are load-mouthed and holier-then-though.

Yes, M.A. represents a totalitarian state that abuses human rights. But still, that is no excuse to go off on a tirade like that when introducing the guy. I agree with some earlier posters that say that the president was trying to make up to the protesters outside. I think a press conference after wards by the president to counter M.A.'s points would have been the appropriate response.

[PittPoliSci]

93. the problem in the middle east doesn't stem from a university's opinions.

it comes from the actions of the United States for decades, and our legacy of removing the secular, nationalist (note: NOT Islamist), democratically elected leaders and replacing them with brutal dictators.

this wave of islamism that we're currently swept into is a product of our own creation. thus, i find it more prudent to stand up against it, and aggressively. There was a time in the not so distant past where Islamism was hardly a force, and men like Nasser and Mossadeh were pushing the Middle East forward. We need to push their legacy, and oppose vehemently the one that M.A. is trying to carve out.

[bhikkhu]

92. Bollinger is shamefully wrong

He speaks as if he has a clean conscience. As a representative of this country, speaking to a representative of another country, a position of humility would be more appropriate. Can one say that the US conscience is clean? Are we not a country that has within living memory oppressed all manner of civil rights? Executed thousands of individuals? Conducted wars of aggression? Wrecked economies? Slain millions? Tortured? Operated secret prisons? Thwarted popular political expression across the planet wherever it went against our economic and political goals? Practised the suppression of homosexuality? Sought the legalization of this suppression? Rewritten history for our own purposes?

Have we made progress on any of these point by the criticism of foreign powers?

The point being again: Bollinger speaks as if his conscience is clean, as do those who cheer him on. While I welcome the discourse on the course of Iranian policies, there is an inevitable and obvious hypocrisy in the message. It is the message of one who sees a hateful image in the mirror, and declares it to be someone else. Or one who find it convenient to deride the rumored habits of a distant neighbor - far beyond any possibility for personal action, while blind to the weeds in his own backyard.

[TomClash]

94. Ironically

He was elected but has less power over issues that matter most to the US than Rafsanjani or Khameni.

I'm all for free speech - a free and frank discussion of issues. Bollinger had the courage to invite him despite puke from people like Pipes, so he can say what he wants or has to. Good for him.

Why can't someone say that directly to Bush?

[frankieT]

96. Good that's so courageous !

I'm sure that this professor and students have equal opportunities to criticize and insult directly Bush, right ? US is the greatest democracy right ? I'm sure this professor will insult Israel president for illegal occupation and daily killings of palestinians right ? I'm sure this professor, these students and all those courageous journalists will insult Saudi royal family next time they show up in NY for the worst human rights records of the ME, right ? The president of Egypt ? The king of Jordan ? President of CHina ? Yeah sure sure.

[rapturedbyrobots]

105. Stop misrepresenting people you don't like

we all know gore didn't say he invented the internet...why
don't we all know ahmadinejad didn't say israel should be
wiped off the map...or that he never denied that the holocaust
happened?

here's some of the text from a letter i sent to bollinger at
columbia, but it applies equally to everybody here who keeps
repeating these dangerous (literally, since they're being used
to help justify war) misrepresentations.

'I am sorely disappointed that the President of a University,
especially one with a reputation as good as Columbia would
bend to weight of ignorance and poor scholarship.  No matter
what type of person and leader Mr. Ahmadinejad may or may not
be, you should at least strive to accurately represent what he
has been documented to have said and done both as an
individual and as the representative of the Islamic Republic
of Iran.

The framework of the agreement which you imposed on Mr.
Ahmadinejad as a requirement of his appearance at Columbia is
disgraceful in the lack of scholarship and irrationality it
reflects.  The first two points are most easily dismissed as
complete misrepresentations of what has been said on record by
Mr. Ahmadinejad.

1) The use of the word 'myth' has been applied correctly in
reference to the Holocaust.  Indeed, it is the founding myth
of the nation of Israel (much as the history of fleeing
religious prosecution is the founding myth of the United
States).  The history of oppression and genocide, the deeply
embedded suffering of the Jewish people has historically been
used a the moral justification for the very existence of
Israel.  This is a correct usage of the most proper definition
of 'myth'.  I challenge you to provide an example of Mr.
Ahmadinejad using the word to challenge whether or not Jews
were actually killed en masse in WWII.  Instead you will find
that he has consistently allowed for the occurence of the
Holocaust, but questioned whether the creation myth of Israel
based on this historical event justifies its existence in the
Middle East vs. Europe or some other Western location.

2) Mr. Ahmadinejad has never called for the destruction of
Israel ('wiped off the map').  This mistranslation into an
English idiom that does not exist in Persian is the result of
poor journalism.  And the continued perpetuation of this
mistranslation even in an academic environment is the result
of poor scholarship.  Juan Cole, Professor of Modern Middle
East and South Asian History at the University of Michigan and
the Middle East Media Research Institute translate his speech
as saying: 'This regime occupying Jerusalem must (vanish
from/be eliminated from) the pages of (time/history).'  It is
a long stretch to conclude that this is a call to genocide. 
The most sensible interpretation is that it is a call for the
end of the occupying Zionist regime, for regime change–a
policy that the United States is currently applying in other
parts of the Middle East.

3) There is no publicly documented evidence of Iran
participating in the violence in Iraq against U.S. forces.  So
why focus on this issue unless you have some evidence that has
not been made public?

4) Similarly, asking Mr. Ahmadinejad to respond to questions
about an undeclared nuclear program is like asking Mr. Bush
about the CIA torturing people in secret prisons around the
world, and will most probably generate a similar answer. 
"We're not building bombs"...right...and we're not
torturing people.

The last two points about religious, gender, and academic
persecution are very relevant and well documented examples of
hegemony and suppression to which Mr. Ahmadinejad should be
made to respond.  If you would have only stuck to these and
not attempted to appease the outrage of the mis- and
uninformed, then you may have been able to preserve the
dignity of your institution.  Instead you have made a very
public statement truly unbefitting of a University President. 
If I were a student at Columbia University I would be ashamed
of this type of leadership, and disgusted with your lack of
scholarship.'

[Megahurtz]

110. Excellent Letter. n/t

[dailykoff]

115. Disgraceful.

Will this shameless idiocy never end?

[Javaman]

119. Odd statement really, considering that mad in the head is

a powerless figurehead in Iran.