Lee Bollinger - Right or Wrong?

[Timex]

Lee Bollinger, president of Columbia University, insisted that the Iranian president Ahmadinejad had the right to speak at Columbia University, but then he savagely introduced his guest with insults and called him a "petty and cruel dictator" among other things before he even began his speech - moved his position from being most hated on Fox News to most admired - so was he right in doing that?

[rurallib]

1. Thought he was talking about Bush.

The clip I saw didn't have him IDed at first. As he went into the litany of wrongs, I thought to myself "I hope he's insured. People who talk like that have car wrecks very frequently"

[MiniMe]

2. If you are going to invite him, then you should give him a decent intro

If you want to call him names (accurate as they may be), then do it, but not in that setting.

[lapfog_1]

3. I don't like Ahmandinejad... not at all... however

if you invite someone over, you shouldn't be insulting or demeaning to them when they arrive.

If you can't be civil, then simply don't invite them over.

In the Arab world, what Bollinger did will only make us look bad and Ahmandinejad look like a hero.

I'm guessing that Bollinger (and the school) invited him to speak and then thought better of ir (probably from pressure groups who oppose Iran), but couldn't bring themselves to dis-invite him (probably because of perceived pressure from groups that support free speech and diplomacy). So he choose a middle path and likely did more harm than good.

[Timex]

9. I think so too

but i thought that dis-inviting him may have been less insulting

[Arkansas Granny]

4. I think he was wrong. It may be that everything he said about

Ahmadinejad was true, but you don't invite the President of another sovereign nation to speak and then trash him with your introduction. Bollinger has just proven to the Iranian people that anything bad they have ever heard about Americans is probably true.

To put this in context, as much as I despise George Bush, I would be incensed if he had been invited to speak at a foreign university and was treated in the same manner. It would not only be a insult to him, but to the United States as well.

[AuntPatsy]

5. I think he was dead wrong in the way he immediately attacked a guest he himself invited to speak.

Now the questions coming from the audience was expected, and Ahmadinejad would have had to agree that putting himself in such a position at that particular venue demanded he answer the questions put forth by the audience, but Bolligner was the host and as a host he has a different set of rules like it or not.

[onenote]

16. Bollinger didn't invite him, SIPA did.

And Bollinger announced publicly, days in advance, exactly what he planned to do. If Ahmadinejad didn't want the treatment he was given, then he could've tried to find a more "friendly" forum.

[LWolf]

6. Wrong.

The whole episode was brutally wrong.

Who, exactly, was filled with and spewing hate at this event? The host, the audience, those outside, and the "journalists" who reported on it.

The U.S. media and citizenry appear more corrupt than the speaker who may not "believe" in the holocaust and says that there are "no gays in Iran."

What a nightmarish humiliation for the nation, and what a warning trumpet for those few who listen as well as hear.

Was there any real purpose in having the Iranian President visit and speak in the U.S., other than a propaganda event designed to drum up support for the nation to go to war again?

[SoCalDem]

7. Just a chickenshit scaredy cat..

His university took the bold step to "invite" the guy, then he saw the backlash , so he equivocated to minimize the "damage" it could cause in fund-raising..


It's like McD "offering" its latest 5000 calorie mcfattyburger, and then reminding people that it comes with a DIET coke..

[AlCzervik]

8. i was not impressed with him or Scott Pelley from 60 minutes.

it looked like a dick waving contest.

[Timex]

10. Ahmadinejad thinks he may have been pressured to do that n/t

[onenote]

11. i had no problem with it at all.

Ahmadinejad is a big boy. And I think someone has to earn respect. Ahmadinejad has done nothing to earn respect from anything I've seen or heard.

[Timex]

13. But would you "invite" someone to speak

and then disrespect them after accepting your invitation? What would that tell you about yourself?

[onenote]

14. First, the invite to speak was from SIPA, not Bollinger. Second, he gave fair warning

The fact that so many here are shocked and outraged by Bollinger's introduction of Ahmadinejad is both sad and hilarious, since it simply reveals that those who are shocked and outraged were paying minimal attention to this entire matter before it occurred. If you had been paying attention you would have known that Bollinger clearly and publicly announced, LAST WEEK, what he intended to do when he introduced Ahmadinejad. If that was a problem for Ahmadinejad, he could've stayed away.


Here's Bollinger's Sept. 19 letter regarding his intentions: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/07/09/ahmadinejad2.html

ENough with the crocodile tears.

[bemildred]

12. Stupid. It was like a gift to Ahm-an-idjit.

He lost the "debate" before it even started.

[bryant69]

15. I was an interesting move

I don't know - did he say anything demonstrably false?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com