Ahmadinejad v. Bollinger: Words Were Spoken, But What Was Said?
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, began his two hours at Columbia University with these words. “In Iran, tradition requires when you invite a person to be a speaker, we actually respect our students enough to allow them to make their own judgment, and don’t think it’s necessary before the speech is even given to come in with a series of complaints to provide vaccination to the students and faculty.”
Nobody can argue that the Iranian President is controversial. Nobody can argue that there are large numbers of Americans who harbor a feeling of intense hatred for the man although, given the fact that a large number of American harbor hatreds for all manner of species with no apparent reason, it is a little difficult to imagine that their animosity towards this particular human being is based on any well-researched facts.
Nonetheless, we can, I think, agree that Mr. Ahmadinejad is not particularly loved, certainly not as much as America’s favorite blue-collar champion, Bruce Springsteen whose concert tickets only sold out, according to the New York Times, marginally faster than those for the Columbia event.
In other words, people turned out in droves to execute the verbal equivalent of the kind of hideous injustices we are all told are practiced in “backward” places, stoning to death, for example, at Columbia University. In Iran, as in most other nations and even, I’ve heard, in some of the more civilized parts of the United States, it is customary to honor a guest with common courtesy if that is all one can muster.
A guest comes in the guise of a speaker, a performer, a diner, or numerous other permutations that embody him or her with special status, but one thing is always true: a guest is invited. An invitation is a communication, expressed both formally and politely, to an individual, asking that they attend a festivity or event of ones own creation. In this case, Columbia University’s president, Lee C. Bollinger, chose to ask a visiting foreign dignitary to grace his campus with his presence. A guest who accepts such an invitation does not envision that they will be publicly humiliated and attacked by their host for the amusement of other attendees.
How embarrassing then that such a thing could occur, at so prestigious a venue as Columbia University, so publicly and at the center of such media attention. How much worse, however, is that not one newspaper in this country chose to point out that Lee C. Bollinger acted appallingly and disgracefully? It is admirable that he chose to invite President Ahmadinejad to speak at his campus, to give a man excoriated by the American government and its oddly un-free press, a chance to state his case. But it is unforgivable that he would choose to backtrack on his initial gesture at the sad expense of his guest, and to the everlasting shame of his country.
I, for one, looked on with disgust. I also took away from the fiasco one new and not surprising bit of information: the President of Iran possesses a grace that neither his host nor the hecklers at Columbia University nor the press in this country nor, I might as well state the obvious, the president of this country can claim. Chalk one up, once again, for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Ru Freeman is a writer and activist. She may be contacted at rfreeman@colby.edu. This article also appeared in The Island, Sri Lanka.
Bollinger was doing bad Vaudeville, in a truly bizarre spectacle. Laughable strangeness: “Here’s the microphone you miserable wretch.” wtf!?
Bollinger did indeed act disgracefully and showed his ignorance in calling the Iranian President a “dictator.” Apparently he isnt aware that Ahmadinejad is an elected leader who weilds far less power in Iran than Bush does here.
Bollinger showed the world what and it means to be an ugly American. If he thought he scored points by being aggressive and rude, I think he is sadly mistaken. He came out looking like an unruly, uneducated fool. And the sad part is that he is the president of that school. The only person he impressed is probably his Zionist masters as the audience were mostly made up of Jews.
I watched the speech with others last night and we all shared Mr. Freeman’s thorough disgust. Nothing academic about inviting Ahmadinejad here only to tar-and-feather him before he’s even stood up. The fact that the president of the university did it is especially rotten. Some professors are like that, completely sure of themselves, standing in front of the subject of study in order to tell all about it (but not willing to give the students any real chance to scrutinize on their own). You saw the spirit of that when they asked questions of the Iranian president that they already had their answers to. Where was the spirit of open exchange? And now I see that it’s not just some professors, but also some university presidents. Pathetic. Ahmadinejad came off as balanced, highly intelligent, and infinitely better mannered than his “hosts.” The sad event was one more shameful American misstep. The whole fiasco says so much more about this country than about Iran and its leader.
Lee C. Bollinger, comments were a digusting display, of what i feel ails this country most.
An arrogance born of chosen ignorance, which is defined as U.S. exceptionalism.
In the words of Eric Hoffer “we lie loudest, when we lie to ourselves”.
Iran… home to a people who were building cities when the majority of our northern European ancestors thought fire was pretty neat thing….
I’m sure that it made Bollinger feel good to spew out his hate. This country used to be based on freedom. Now that the religious have taken over, it’s based on hate. Hate for Islam. Hate for homosexuals. Hate for abortionists. Hate for Iraqis. Hate for ANYONE or ANYTHING that doesn’t think like you, act like you, or believe like you. I saw the faces of the people outside the building holding their “Go To Hell” signs. The hatred in their eyes mimiced the Nazi’s perfectly. Fascism is here and it’s source is the church.
I am sending him a letter telling him how badly he embarrassed CU, the academic world, and viewers and listeners to the pillory, excuse me, forum. We all ought to send him letters.
Dr. Lee Bollinger
President
Columbia University
535 W. 116th St.
202 Low Library
Mail Code 4309
New York, NY 10027
I find it unfortunate that Ahmadinejad was willing to stand up in front of a group of educated and articulte college students and have to try to defend his positions, as controversial as most of them are, BUT our own President Bush has NEVER been willing to do the same. Bush has addressed students at the Military academies, but has NEVER done what Ahmadinejad did at Columbia, and that is stand up in front of Amercian college students, with NO SCRIPT, and NO “handlers” and defend his positions. I don’t think he EVER will either.
Ru, you say not one newspaper in the country chose to point out that Lee Bollinger acted disgracefully. This morning the Seattle Post-intelligencer attempted that in their editorial section. Granted, I would have liked their comments to be much stronger, but at least they did write this:
“First he got an inflammatory intro from Lee Bollinger, in which the university president called Ahmadinejad a ‘petty, cruel dictator,’ accusing him of being either ‘brazenly provacative or astonishingly uneducated.’ Imagine President Bush standing on a stage at Tehran University and getting dressed down by the university president for 14 minutes before speaking. Riveting stuff.”
I can not believe that Lee C. Bollinger is the President of an Ivy League University. He does not have the class to be in a community college. But neither do most other Americans including the media. Even HuffingtonPost reported the ill-mannered and rude stuff that Bollinger said like he had done a great thing.
The immediate impression I had of Bollinger’s speeech was one of ‘Okay, now we have made the case for bombing Iran. Let’s get started.’
Full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes.
Freeman says very well what should be said by all of the MSM (Main Stream Media), but the fact that it is not being said speaks volumes about what the USA is and isn’t. It is on the “slippery slope” to fascism, and it is not a freedom loving society that seeks the truth and justice.
This event certainly sounds like a President of a prominent University looking out for the endowment of his school by catering to its donor base. Very simple.
The leader of a University is a political, not an academic, agent. His or her job is to raise the performance of the school, with a special eye to fund-raising.
I am with a lot of the posters here in that I sympathize with those that are under the boot. The boot is on the face of anyone who is not receiving marching orders from Washington and who resides in an area of the world that is of strategic interest.
Though my instinct is sympathy for these hapless people, I also try to keep an open mind. Maybe the President of Iran is, in fact, somewhat of a hazard. If he is, of course, it might also be an inevitability based on our aggressive stance in the region and our over-reaching imperial disrespect for the sovereignty of all other countries.
The Columbia event could have been a chance to gather some meaningful information on the man. As it was, he just showed himself to possess dignity in the face of baseness. That is, in my experience, a characteristic of a devout Muslim — and of a legitimate Christian.
Yesterday morning a question was called in on Cspan: Would the president of Columbia University invite President Bush to speak as President Ahmadinejad has been invited? The assistant Dean replied, of course. I would wonder what type of introduction President Bollinger would offer given the track record of President Bush.
Everett Murphy M.D.
Given the outcry from our right-wing government officials via the media they own, coupled with the tantrums of their devotees, it’s no wonder Bollinger caved to the pressure and threw red meat to them. Bollinger’s entire diatribe against Ahmadinejad was a carefully crafted appeasment gesture to our Imperlistic corporate establishment. The voice of MONEY, the mega weapon of Capitalism, as usual, dominated triumphantly over all other voices.
Bollinger proved that he was the petty, cruel president at the forum. How embarrassing for Columbia University and for the USA. How come Bollinger never managed the courage to direct those words towards our own petty, cruel dictator?
Bollinger is a coward. His character assassination of President Ahmadinejad is typical of AIPAC and the swift boat neocon mob. They are thugs dressed in suits, but even more important, they are liars. Ahmadinejad never called for the destruction of Israel or denied the holocaust. These are two hot buttons that are being manipulated by Israel, AIPAC, and the neocons to set us up for an attack on Iran. And judging from the number of NY protesters, once again the people are drinking the kool aid!
I hope Lee Bollinger watched Charlie Rose’s interview with President Ahmadinejad last night to learn a little about the man and his country.
I do not agree with many of Iran’s policies but I cannot agree with any of the shameful words that were used to introduce the guest from Iran. Even George Bush has used more diplomatic language.
To paraphrase the old Chinese observation: These men from America are apes wearing hats.
I came away from viewing this embarrassing spectacle convinced that Bollinger is a first class asshole. What a fucking turd! I’m sure that anyone with an ounce of intelligence saw the same thing.
A view of things to come… chillingly prescient.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw2nkoGLhrE
I know it was meant as satire… but view of Bollinger and the rest of the MSM, I think it’s now VERY accurate.
Persian hospitality is world renowned and goes back to ancient traditions. You never ever ever insult a guest even if that guest is your bitter enemy in Persian culture. Shame on Bollinger. I am against a lot of Ahmedinijad’s views and his oppression of his own people as I am a big supporter of Shirin Ebadi. However, freedom of speech means freedom of speech even when we are against the message. We can learn alot from this experience always treat a guest with honor and respect and freedom of speech means a person has the right to express thier views.
Of course its blatantly obvious who Bollinger was pandering to.
Somewhere I heard it was the Dean who did the actual inviting and the President was the one who bowed to Israeli firsters howling at the gates.
They certainly have any trouble getting media coverage.
Bollinger made a MAJOR mistake by allowing Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia. Bollinger’s rude introduction was an attempt on Bollinger’s part to backpedal and make amends with the millions of people in the US that wonder wtf he was doing. Too late. Bollinger should be removed for allowing this freak show to take place.
Exposure to differing opinions is important as is meaningful conversation. However, anyone who has listened to Ahmadinejad knows that he is not capable of such a conversation. No holocaust? No gays in Iran? Yeah right.
He thinks we’re stupid and those of you who are willing to listen to the foul offal that spews from his lips are merely validating his belief. Get a clue.
Conversations with Ahmadinejad are a good idea when he realizes that we will not accept his misinformation and deception.
Gees that sounds like a good reason for other countries to keep our little Dictator decider away from their shores too.
What do you want to bet the above poster has an agenda? And can you guess what it might be?
Sorry, Vern. You’re wrong again. I don’t listen to Bush either. I just count the days until he’s gone.
dmia, this is me laughing in your face for the sheer stupidity of everything you just said and how you chose to say it.
Defending My Ignorance Aggressively. Wow. Seriously. Good job.
Why don’t you get a clue, dmia, instead of gobbling up Neocon charges to make the attack on Iran? How long do you think the Goyum army will fight these wars for oil and Israel before the blowback starts?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm
The verbal equivalent of a stoning? Please. Just tell me when you’d prefer to be stoned rather than embarrassed.
Jaded Prole, perhaps he meant that he has a secretary, who takes dictation?
Vern: The troops will fight right until they realize that their route home through the Straights of Hormuz is blocked by sunken oil tankers and they have to go overland to Israel and Syria. Or Afghanistan.
“attempt on Bollinger’s part to backpedal and make amends”
dmia
Apparently the school is to be disciplined anyway by the powers that be, sort of reinforces that old saw that goes “It doesn’t matter how you kiss their ass they will still shit right in your face”.
“No holocaust? No gays in Iran?”
dmia
Who cares about gays, besides other gays and their families? No wars will be fought on their behalf. The holocaust is fast fading in light of the aggressions against the Palestinians. When the whole world finally figures out what has been going on what will be made of the holocaust then?
The man also makes a good point about the events of 9/11, particularly as this is perceived as an event for animosity towards Iran. Ahmadinejad also is correct in pointing out the breach of protocol and manners to his hosts. What buffoons!
Great article, Ru thank-you for most eloquently describing what happened.
Ru Freeman states “…a large number of American harbor hatreds for all manner of species with no apparent reason, it is a little difficult to imagine that their animosity towards this particular human being is based on any well-researched facts.”
No apparent reason you say. Research might tell you that about half of all Americans are women and they might just not like his saying that “The freest women in the world are women in Iran” while he and his mullah colleagues institute such lovely reforms as:
• Enforcement of compulsory hejab (or veil) or the Islamic code of dress, which deprived women of the right to choose their own attire;
• Repeal of reforms in family laws;
• A ban on appointment of women as judges and expulsion or change of the employment status of female judges;
• Forbidding women employed by the armed forces from receiving military ranks and reducing their employment status to that of office employees;
• Stoppage of the family planning and population control policy;
• Legislation of the Islamic Penal Code according to which women’s right to live is not protected as the right of a full human being and in which young girls of nine years of age (but not boys) are considered of age of criminal responsibility, and the decision that testimony of women is not the equivalent of the testimony of men;
• Emphasis on the absolute right of custody for the father or the paternal grandfather in the matter of matrimony of female children to the extent that the father or the grandfather can marry a child of nine years of age to any man he intends.
You might have a problem imagining how in the world they could be justified in harboring animosity towards this man, but gee, I think I can see how some well-researched facts about women and how they’re treated in Iran could peeve them off just a bit- especially if they have a nine year old daughter!
Homosexuals might harbor some animosity when they hear him say “”In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country. In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don’t know who’s told you that we have this.” And if you can’t understand why that might create some animosity in the 10% plus of Americans who are Gay, perhaps the fact that this fellow supports laws stoning them to death for loving one another- does that help you to understand?
And of course Jews and all those who helped fight and defeat the horror that was the Third Reich, quite a few Americans, know the well researched fact that this man denies the existence of the Holacaust- people such as David Duke just attended his conference in Iran on this subject.
You think he has grace. I think you’re and idiot.
Right on, Clarity. I think they’re idiots too. They allow themselves to be manipulated by this little tyrant. Apparently they have lost ability to think for themselves.
What’s all this hysteria about the Holocaust about? I’ve heard that people are imprisoned for denying the Holocaust took place. Jews aren’t the only people in history who have been killed in war.
Right-wing Christians should be happy about Iran’s policy towards homosexuals as they hate gays. Some people are never satisfied; they’ve just got to complain about everything.
Ahmadinejad comes across as intelligent and dignified.
Why don’t we just get rid of “Old Glory” and replace it with the Israeli flag/Star of David and get it over with.
You are the idiot for jumping on board to pound those war drums!
So you think we should bomb regions of the South for their pockets of ignorant Racism? How about evangelical churches? How about the women in Saudi Arabia who can’t drive? How about Jewish orthodox women with their ridiculous hats?
You are the idiot to think we should invade and bomb another country obviously, as made obvious by you amped up speech, as if we are so perfect by comparison.
December 11, 2000
UNITED WE MUST STAND! LET US NEVER FORGET
Who said anything about war with Iran? I didn’t. You’re the one talking about war. I think we should stay as far away from Iran as we can. Can you read?
“dmia September 25th, 2007 12:51 pm
Right on, Clarity. I think…”
Do you? The results are not immediately apparent.
Stinger_28: Can YOU read?
I have no problem with Bollinger’s boorish rudeness. I think speaking truth to power is a good habit to develop. Make sure you practice it at home. Extend it to all leaders of all states. Criticism and protest is our duty.
dmia: You are engaging in the rhetoric to amp up war talk. Don’t fall for it. Can you think?
Vern, can you read?
Although I do not agree with some points of Ahmadinejad’s speech, which is understandable since he is a President of the Islamic Republic of Iran not USA, I have more respect for him now than before his speech at the Columbia University. The hateful introduction speech given by the Columbia University’s President was extremely disrespectful and embarrassment for the entire nation. He just repeated the accusations of Bush administration and necons. I demand Mr. Bollinger to proof his accusations about Iran to American public, since what he said and done might affect all of us.
I had to chuckle to myself when Ahmedinejad said there were no gays in Iran… and I thought to my self… just like there are no gays in the Senate prowling public washrooms, or gay televangelists, or gay prositutes masquerading as journalists staying overnight in the Whitehouse.
Once I was called into the dean’s office at Columbia for violating another rule, throwing fire crackers or climbing out on a roof. The Dean, while threatening me with expulsion leaned across his desk reasoning with me on the importance of completing my degree, “columbia is about money,” he said. I was still young enough to be completely astounded that a college dean would suggest something like this to me. My reply was, “I thought it was about getting an education.” I was living in Mark Rudd’s former room in Furnald Hall and felt the vibes.
While I was a student there you could see the divide and the brewing civil war that exists in this country between those who chose a lucrative life in the corporate world, and those of us who selected a different path.
The thing is both the media and all institutions in this country are not going to print or say the truth because they are facing several nightmarish and radical scenarios, one of which is that their entire reality is false and based on a fabrications and lies.
No one wants to find out that they have been living a delusion. I believe Ahmadinejad spoke about that yesterday when he commented that one of the goals of the human being was to uncover the truth. I think this is true for those of us struggling to become better informed and enlightened. But not so much for those who are about money.
The Columbia University President, Mr Bullying-ger, instead of conducting a civilized discussion managed to create a circus in which he ended as the clown.
Yes, dmia. I can. Let’s have a look and see if you can keep up.
In your earlier post, you presume to know what millions of others are thinking.
Why? Can you not stand to sustain your arguments by yourself without this grandiose claim?
‘Bollinger should be removed…’ True, but for his ridiculous treatment of a foreign dignitary, invited to make a speech at his university. If it was a mistake, it was his, not Dr. Ahmadinejad’s. His total lack of any appropriate class or decorum was shameful in the extreme.
Should Iran’s president be chastised by those who disagree with him? Of course he should, and he stepped forward and provided an opportunity that left him open to this as well, but the character assassination that took place before he was even allowed to speak bears no excuse for someone who hold Mr. Bollinger’s station.
‘anyone who has listened to Ahmadinejad knows that he is not capable of such a conversation.’
Again, you assume to speak for ‘anyone who has listened’ and have decided for yourself what they do or do not know about what they heard?
You don’t find that at all pretentious?
‘He thinks we’re stupid’ You know this for a fact do you? You read minds?
‘and those of you who are willing to listen to the foul offal that spews from his lips are merely validating his belief. Get a clue.’
Really? This ‘we you’re referring to is so stupid for listening and obviously must also be so stupid that they can not determine what is ‘foul offal’ or not for themselves.
They need you to this decide for them, do they?
‘Conversations with Ahmadinejad are a good idea when he realizes that we will not accept his misinformation and deception.’
Again, who is ‘we’? How many do you speak for and do you do so with their consent? ‘Misinformation and deception?’ Given the churning of the propaganda machine to vilify him as some kind of maniac, as a pretext to waging a ‘just war’ if there is such a thing, that sounds like hypocrisy of the highest order.
But that’s just my opinion. Me. On my own. No nameless millions backing me up. Shut me up dmia. Try it.
geoff29: What truth do you need to discover about the Holocaust? This is one of the most documented events in history. Have you ever been to Germany or Poland to visit one of the concentration camps? I guarantee such a trip would be a learning experience for you.
But Ahmadinejad tells us the Holocaust is a myth. And you’re suggesting we have something to learn from him?
I believe that we should be open minded and tolerant if we hope to live in a civilized world. But there is a line that must be drawn between alternative points of view and BS.
I realize Bush is no better than Ahmadinejad. That’s why we must be willing to draw a line and take a stand once in a while.
dcbeltway, your comments about Persian hospitality are spot-on. I’m certain that the future bodes ill for Bollinger as the Goddess of Hospitality will not let this gross afrontory pass without retribution. Karma has its ways, and he will get his.
What a lot of these angry “screaming red blooded Americans” seem to be asking is that only the US media be allowed to interview Ahmadinejad and report back to our country that used to treasure free speech and academic freedom. Strange the appearance at Columbia sparked such silly outrage but not one of these jerks appears troubled at all with the CNN interview by Christiane Amanpour tomorrow. Sterilized news and views have become “patritotic”?
As to the insults to the intelligence of the President of Iran I’ve yet to see someone take on his pertinent question as to WHY the people of Palestine are paying so dearly for the Holocaust ? Likewise I fail to see why women’s rights in Iran is any of our business or anyone else’s except the Iranian’s. What has that got to do with appropirate international concerns about terror and nuclear weapons?
stinger_28: Again, I said nothing about war.
Yes, I believe Bollinger’s introduction was inappropriate.
I believe that the Holocaust happened.
I believe there are gays in Iran.
I, by myself, on my own, do not believe Ahmadinejad has anything to say that I haven’t already heard him say.
Is this post ok with you?
I agree with Ms. Freeman. Mr. Bollinger’s bad manners were simply appalling. America and its leaders used to be better than this.
dmia: Can you read?
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Zinn/RespectingHolocaust.html
http://www.juancole.com/2007/06/ahmadinejad-i-am-not-anti-semitic.html
when I think about the holocaust, I am reminded of the extermination of the native americans. To me, and after reading such native thinkers as Vine Delorea, the native american is one of the more truly Christian peoples and cultures. Nevermind Custer,they have quietly gone about their business “leaving revenge to the lord.” What deep and complex observations must they have had on their own from nature, from living with each other?
Of course this is all generalities. I’m sure there are specific instances that go the other way, as there are americans who do not agree on fundamental principles with the way this country is going or maybe has ever gone.
Generally, and I think you have to speak in generalities, what you see from the holocaust is that you become that which you hate so you had better be careful. And after only half a century, in many ways this culture has become the enemy that we once fought, most of us at commondreams I think see that as clear as day.
Ahmadinejad is compared to Hitler and yet Bush has killed more people than he. Would Bollinger call Bush a petty and cruel dictator to his face?
Israel and its supporters are global troublemakers.
Talk about destructive chutzpah.
PS to Galen–apes are smarter than american politicians–and chinese ones too.
dmia
Does it matter? Why? Who am I to you?
Do you again need others to validate what you say?
I disagree with the argument you presented and the way in which you presented it, and I said so. Do you not think that these nameless others you have mentiioned could do the same upon hearing President Ahmadinejad’s speech?
I think the greater ‘we’ or ‘they’ or ‘anyone’ to whom you have referred are not as stupid as you suggest. That’s just my opinion though. As you were.
Vern, I’ve heard your opinion. You’ve heard mine. Neither of us respect the other. Are we done now?
What i would like to give the Iranian president credit for is the fact that during his speech he raised a very important point: the need to unify our scientific community with our spiritual side. Science and spirituality are what will bring this world truth, or “illumination” as the president put it. Call him a mad man, the man has a point. maybe we should listen. other than that, i would like to see Bush even try to come close to giving a speech in ANY country, particularly the Arab-Islamic world, about science and spirituality. lets see how that would go!
A pox on all the great criminals…the leaders of nation states everywhere.
BTW, does ancient Persian courtesy toward guests that must NEVER be trespassed include the US embassy hostages held for 444 days in ‘79,’80, and ‘81?
After reading this thread, in particular, I get a sick feeling… precognition if you will….
The Archetypal Psyche of America’s Soul is going from sick to something dreadfully worse….When all the OIL WARS are over the Karmic Retribution will be a SHOCKER….
In Columbia University President Bollinger’s own words, “If today shows us anything it will be how much work there is ahead of us.” Yes, how much work Columbia has to do to be a symbol of how international affairs are to be conducted. If George Bush had run the talk I think he could have done as well!
I take it Bollinger and Columbia are now pretty much guaranteed grants and political favours? Does Columbia offer journalism courses -”Crass journalism in 6 easy lessons” and how about books “The Idiot’s Guide to Ugly Americanism” in case anyone needs a tune up on the finer points of boorish behaviour?
‘A pox on all the great criminals…the leaders of nation states everywhere.’
Does that include the USA?
(You know, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, CIA ‘rendition’ gulags in Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia etc…)
Leaders behaving badly. I thought democracy was supposed to help with that.
(darned thing’s busted *kick* *kick*)
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that Ahmadinejad is no more a champion of democracy than Bush. Remember, he denied the holocaust, closed down newspapers. Bush’s stupid policy made him, like Saddam Hussein and Hugo Chavez come out smelling like a rose.
It seems Dr. Bollinger consulted Iranians who do not mind a US/Israel attack on Iran.
Please read Dr. Ervand Abrahamian, Iran expert and CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York (the author of TARGETING IRAN); read Ms. Azar Derakhshan (the editor of the Women of March 8 magazine), read people with common sense and historical knowledge.
Please remember that the translation was not accurate at all times. Some of the historical facts referenced is not known in the US (the terrorists killing Iranian leadership within months of the 1979 revolution were backed by the US).
Why choose a woman to be the voice over for the president of Iran? Ideology plays intricately at all levels.
Some of you don’t seem to be aware that the Iranian leader does not speak English. I’m thinking of those people that were laughing at the Iranian’s reported comments, for example “no gays in Iran” or “women are the best treated in the world”. He was being badly interpreted, on the fly, into English. Don’t you think you would sound occasionally hilarious if you tackled a complex subject at an Iranian university and had to rely on a substandard interpreter? The translation I listened to was by someone who was struggling with English. She was clearly missing the nuance.
As for the substance of what was said, when the audience laughed at the “no gays in Iran” remark, it reminded me of the US “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
And I have to say, that was some classy welcome for a foreign elected dignitary. Bravo Columbia University for showing how far into ignorance and hate some of America’s best and brightest have fallen. But it must be hard for Columbia’s president to accept capital punishment in Iran. Maybe he thought that torture and the death penalty were what make the US special?
Using the logic of “Iran’s treatment of women is no ones business but the Iranians” then “South Africa’s treatment of blacks is no ones business but the South Africans” would have made sense. I don’t agree with Bollinger’s introduction (if you were going to do this then don’t invite him in the first place) but I do think that the President of Iran should be asked some hard questions about the treatment of Arabs and other minorities in Iran, particularly if he is going to criticize other countries treatment of civilian populations.
here come’s bligh into the discussion again playing with socratic dialogue and being the devil’s advocate!
Bligh,
you mean it is ok for the US to criticize other countries but not otherwise? I mean the US is doing a heckuva job in Iraq to deserve praise don’t you think?
I almost fell over laughing when Bush told the US to help spread freedom and democracy while he goes about spreading oppression and occupation. Is that what nobody should criticize?
Bollinger did exactly what Rove told him to do… or else a story that includes pages and footsie and bathrooms and New Orleans hookers might just leak out…
Of course, he may have been worried that common decency towards the “axis of evil” monster might result in the freezing of his assets by the domestic enemies of our Constitution still hold up in our White House…
Okay, Bligh, and Israeli contemptible treatment of the Palestinians?
I thank the author for an excellent analysis of the Columbia lecture event; and I recommend that anyone who has not already viewed the entire event on C-SPAN do so now, to make his/her own evaluation. The latter recommendation relates to perhaps the most powerful point that the invited speaker made: in an institution of higher learning, students should be presumed capable of making their own evaluations of a speaker’s ideas, without the assistance of institutional authorities. As to the various evils and dangers attributed to the speaker in President Bollinger’s introduction, missing was any accusation that the nation of Iran has ever committed the crime of aggressive war against another nation. By contrast, according to recent CNN and Washington Post articles on the September 6, 2007 military attack on Syria by Israel — after consultation with and approval of our Government — within the past three weeks Israel and the US have blatantly violated the UN Charter’s primary collective-security provisions, prohibiting any member nation from unilaterally attacking any other member nation (excepting only in response to an actual or imminent attack, which the CNN and Post stories make clear had not occurred). It is amazing to me how the US media can report the September 6 attack on Syria by Israel (and our Government), without even mentioning the immorality and illegality of an act of aggressive war which is not only forbidden by the UN Charter (and therefore violative of 60-year-old US treaty obligations) but is essentially the same “Crime Against Peace” for which top German political leaders were tried, convicted and executed in the first Nuremburg Trial in 1946. All that CNN and the Post tell us is that “unnamed government officials” of both Israel and the US are “satisfied” and “happy” with the results of the September 6 attack. It’s as if our media were discussing the results of a bank robbery with the robbers, and sharing with us the technical difficulties that the robbers had to overcome in their . . . what? Noble endeavor? Apparently I am in the rapidly shrinking minority of Americans who are naive enough to believe in a “rule of law.” All hail to the New Germans and the advent of “might makes right.” Farewell to sanity.
I feel the need to jump in on this one for dmia and bligh. Doesn’t anyone else feel that this kind of Left orthodoxy of “condemn our own government, and that’s it” is kind of, well, silencing? Doesn’t it seem that there’s a solidarity lacking with those in Iran who are fighting their leaders (read: Khamenei, Ahmadinejad, etc.) just as we are here?
Really, if the questions I just asked make you feel as if I’m some stooge for the war criminals of Bush & Co., maybe you should reexamine why you’re a “Leftist” or “progressive” or whatever it may be that you self-identify as. Aren’t there some principles that we should be unwaveringly projecting? Like being against ALL oppression, wherever it raises its ugly head. Remember, not one of us is free while anyone anywhere is oppressed.
Not when the underlying intent is to ultimately attack and kill.
If any of us were caught unawares last time about the true intent of the propaganda push against the evil-doers and liberation of the poor oppressed masses desperate for democracy–really should know better this time around, yes?
So, how are the Palestinians faring under Israel again? Oh that’s right, they are not oppressed, they are what we call terrorists, right?
Soon the Iranians who our hearts are supposed to bleed for now will become terrorist insurgents–and where will your fiddle be then?
Let’s make something clear: the propaganda push by the government of the United States is just what you say it is, propaganda and the attempt to get us to swallow what is yet another imperialist war. That is not the ground I’m taking when I call for solidarity.
The ground I am calling for us to stand on is that of people-to-people solidarity. It explicitly calls for empowerment of all people against their governments. Why would you assume that this would not include Palestinians fighting occupation as well as support for the Other Israel, silenced by their government while maintaining an amazing anti-Occupation and pro-Peace movment? The Palestinians are, of course, oppressed and NOT terrorists. You’re assuming too much, Vern. It’s time to not let the leaders of countries determine how we oppose them and which side to take to play devil’s advocate. I’ll oppose them all, thank you very much.
doug1871, as we speak of Iranian leaders let us not forget the recent reformist Mohammad Khatami, whose entire agenda was rebuffed and set back by the bellicose sabre rattling of the Bush Administration that had a substantial consequence of promoting religious jingoism in Iran with the direct consequence of Ahmadinejad first as an anti-reformist Mayor of Tehran and then as Anti-reformist President of Iran.
Ahmadinejad is a populist hack milking his metonymy for all it’s worth and the US continues to play the straight man, and he returns the favor, both inebriate their followers with jingoism and then lead them tottering down the garden path.
“waiguoren” wrote:
>> BTW, does ancient Persian courtesy toward guests that
>> must NEVER be trespassed include the US embassy
>> hostages held for 444 days in ‘79,’80, and ‘81?
Considering that the former Iranian prime minister, was overthrown in a CIA-backed coup in 1953, maybe it was a prudent protective measure to grab a few hostages. With all due respect to those hostages and their families, can’t we do other than see ourselves as lily white in these matters? If we want to take the high ground, then let’s actually take it and behave with dignity despite the actions of others. When we stoop to lows, we become low.
Apparently ONLY criticism of the U.S.,England, and Israel is allowed on this forum. This is not a zero sum game, EVERY answer to an injustice committed outside of these countries cannot simply be answered with “Yeah, but what about what Israel is doing to the Palestinians” or ” Yeah, but the U.S. is fighting an illegal war in Iraq”. Where does this leave the people that are suffering in other countries? What, they don’t count as long as Israel is in the West Bank and the U.S. is in Iraq? The U.S. and Israel are justifiably held up to world wide criticism and condemnation for these injustices. This doesn’t mean that other countries are lily-pure and without fault.
To point out the hypocrisy of the President of Iran pretending to care about the welfare of Palestinian Arabs while overseeing the brutal ethnic cleansing of Ahwazi Arabs from the oil rich area of southern Iran (1.8 million in seven years) does not mean that don’t think that Israels policies are not brutal and wrong.But does that mean it is no ones business until a two state solution is reached?
Hell, my 11 year old can see the logical fallacy in that argument.
Too many posters on this forum seem to be threatened by any deviation from “approved thought” on the subject Du Jour . NO intelligent person could POSSIBLY deviate from this “approved thought” in the smallest way. They must be evil republicans invading our site, or paid “shills”, or Halliburton employees, or from the Carlyle Group,or racist,or stupid and evil- trying to divert our attention from “the truth”.
How about something really unusual-like using your own brain, research, intuition, logic ect. to state a position and then see if it is defensible and correct? Then change if needed.
Well, if this is not supposed to be a discussion group I suggest posting one “approved forum piece” and letting everyone sign it. It will save time and energy.
I, for one, have learned things from posters on this forum-even when I didn’t initially agree with them.
There are some who post who seem to do the same, just wish there were more of you.
Best Regards
I was astonished how Americans are ignorant on foreign affair, considering that even president of one of the best academic institutions of this country exposed his ignorance about the basic political structure of Iran when he called Ahmadinejad “dictator”, or did he act as a part of propaganda system? That is so disgraceful as a head of any academic institution. Did he know that President of Iran was elected by popular vote? Does he know above Ahmadinejad, there is a Islamic Council that is the most powerful political decision making institution that can easily impeach the president? Does he know that Ayatollahs cross out any candidates from the ballot whom mullahs dislike?
I am not defending Ahmadinejad, most parts that the media described are happening in Iran. But, should Mr. Bollinger be more fair to what is really happening around the Middle East? US is conducting the war that is designed to expand its hegemony right next to Iran, US has blown out so many opportunities to achieve peaceful atomosphere with Iran when Iran walking toward the US when KHatami was the President.
If you want to know about more US-Iranian relations, go to google and type “Faramarz Farbod.” His article titled “On real and Manufactured Crisis” will appear. It is an excellent aricle about this subject thus you should read it and see what is really happening.
Finally, Mr. BOllinger as well as US corporate media created an atomosphere that war with Iran could break out at any time. This even could be a trigger to another major war in that region that Bush wants so badly.
Abe
Come on,get to the monks!
stinger_28 September 25th, 2007 2:42 pm
‘A pox on all the great criminals…the leaders of nation states everywhere.’
Does that include the USA?
SINCE YOU ASK: everywhere means EVERYWHERE.
dmgreenaz September 25th, 2007 4:17 pm
ALSO COMMENTED.So I’ll simply ask:
How does a reference to the CIA-backed coup in Iran in 1953 answer my question about Persian hospitality?
I am not at all surprised at the way Bollinger behaved at the Iranian president. He represents the ARROGANCE and SELF-RIGHTEOUS attitude of Americans, even though the rest of the world is watching the American terrorist and genocidal activities in Iraq and other parts of the world.
You can never compare Ahmedinejad with a terrorist and blood-thirsty monster Bush. Yet Americans are proud of their evil and monstrous PRESIDENT. That itself shows the mindset and the attitude of the American public.
So how can anyone expect a better behaviour from these arrogant Americans? Do they have a concept of “honouring and respecting a guest”? They only know plundering other sovereign nations by occupying their lands and natural resources and killing innocent children, women, and men. They take pride in these activities. They call this “a city-on-a hill”. This “city-on-a hill” is built on innocent blood of native Americans. They think that these are “higher values”.
I admire at the courage of Ahmedinejad, who has shown to Americans in America, what BETTER AND HIGHER VALUES are. Americans! learn from him what it means to respect even those with whom you may not agree. You do not want to come out of your “small and mean” world. He only tried to help you come out of that.
Watch the interview with Ahmedinejad aired by CBS 60 minutes on 23rd September. You will see the contrast between Ahmedinejad and the American arrogance.
Hey there little dmia. We don’t drink or smoke kool-aid around here.
Excerpts from Ahmedinejad’s Interview on 60 minutes with Pelley: An Outing of Truth to Stop the Neocon/AIPAC led march of the US to war with Iran. (in two parts to post - - Part I and Part II)
Part I (sections 1-5)
Part II (sections 6-10)
Below I have segmented the interview to highlight major issues on which the Iranian President Mahmud Ahmedinejad articulated clear, logical answers, often repeating them for the imbecilic Pelley’s pea brain. In doing so, and again on the Charlie Rose Show today, he put paid to the canard floated by Bushco, AIPAC and their MSM lapdogs for the ever ignorant, attention- challenged American sheeple that he is an Iranian “Islamofascist”, “anti- semite” nut case, despised by his people.
He brimmed with confidence, talked to Pelley as a patient teacher would talk to a smart-ass teenager know- nothing, who is being an obnoxious American ugly. Pelley was blown off the water and never surfaced again except to tediously repeat questions as if in a state of panic and paralysis of intelligence, whatever little he had to begin with. Charlie Rose was out- flanked and out- manoeuvred as a novice chess player would be against a chess master. Ahmedinejad even told Rose he was a professor (of probably poli-science, sociology or philosophy in Iran); but this went right by Rose’s thick skull. Rose became redder and redder in the face as the chess master/professor with deft moves and a smiling face (smiling with bemusement at the low level of sophistication about the MEast and lack of reasoning ability of Rose - - America’s “foremost” political interviewer) made hash of his talking points.
The Pelley interview shows that Pelley had been primed with Chenney/AIPAC talking points. He made (repeatedly like a broken record) all the usual scurrilous charges the American/Israeli war machine could muster to “show” to the world that Ahmedin’d was a crazy person in charge of a rogue military and serving a dictatorial regime of clerics in a country stuck in the Middle Ages. All this effort to demonise the Iranian leader, his people and his government came to naught - - Ahmedinejad speaking extempore showed the world how superb a grasp he has of world affairs and the ME as region and how childish and blundering the Americans were in the ME.
I will let the excerpts speak for themselves. I have provided a short description at the head of each segment to allow for better absorption. There is a tremendous amount of info. In the interview. Therefore some highlighting was necessary IMO. Sorry if it jars some people, but I hope this selection will help many people. Please send it to friends so that perhaps we may be able to stop the Neocon war mongers from setting fire to the ME and possibly the world by a reckless attack on Iran.
________________________________________________________
PART I (1-5)
1. Pelley, self appointed voice of the American “people” getting a drubbing from Ahmedinejad:
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I’m amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?
PELLEY: Well, the American nation . . .
AHMADINEJAD: . . . you are representing a media and you’re a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there. I would like to think that the points of view of the American people [are] very close to the points of view of the Iranian people…
______________________________________________________
2. Pelley, being told to tell the American gangsters to take their 160,000 Mafia-like killers of 1 million Iraqis home first before lecturing to Iran
PELLEY: As a goodwill gesture, will you say right now in this interview that you will do everything in your power to prevent Iranian arms from entering Iraq?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, Iranian forces are not inside Iraq. Can you show me one?
PELLEY: No sir, Iranian arms, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Please, allow me to continue. Please, allow me to finish my thought. [This request is repeated throughout the interview as Pelley continually, and rudely interrupts Ahmedinejad. I will highlight this to show how often Pelley was so admonished by his patient guest]The American government has admitted that with more than 160,000 troops, state-of-the-art military equipment, they have failed to control and put a stop to the activities of these few people. That’s very unfortunate. You shouldn’t accuse others because you have certain problems yourself…
_______________________________________________________
3. Only an American idiot from the AIPAC crowd would behave like Pelley towards the President of a 4000 year civilized nation - - Iran. And Ahmedinejad shows his character as a patient, well informed, cosmopolitan citizen of the world suffering an imbecile, ugly American to patiently inform the American people and the world who is right and who is wrong.
PELLEY: Mr. President, we appreciate your thoughts. Some people watching this interview, frankly, will think that you’re dodging the questions because many of the questions that I ask you are fairly straightforward “yes” or “no” questions. And let me try this one again, if I may. Will you pledge tonight to do everything in your power to prevent Iranian arms from entering Iraq? Can you make that pledge?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I think you have been charged with a mission to repeat a sentence over and over again. My comments are very clear. I think that you should go back and take American officials to task. Use the same force you’re using right now so that they take the troops out.
PELLEY: Was that a “yes” or a “no,” sir?
AHMADINEJAD: If you are to take sides, well, I don’t know. Well, you shouldn’t tell me what kind of answer I should give to you. You’re free to ask me questions. I didn’t put any limitations on your questions.
PELLEY: True.
AHMADINEJAD: I’m free to give my own answers. I think that all of us should go to American officials and ask them: “What are you looking for in Iraq? Let’s be clear. Why have you stayed behind? Why are you accusing others? And your policies have created insecurity. You are behind terrorism. So once you correct your ways, these things will take care of themselves. Why are you using a road that goes to nowhere? Use the correct road.”
AHMADINEJAD: We support the rights of all nations. We love all nations. And the message of the Iranian people is friendship with all. In our history, we have never attacked another country, occupied another country. This is a peace-loving nation. And you should remember that we are living within our borders. And people who have brought troops from thousands of miles away, they are the ones who should be held accountable and responsible.
______________________________________________________
4. Pelley now speaking for the Palestinians as only an AIPAC stooge would be presumptuous to do. Ahmedinejad tells him, let the Palestinians speak for themselves freely. Pelley, of course, does not get it…
PELLEY: If the Palestinians reach an agreement with Israel for a two-state solution, will you then recognize Israel as well?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, the decision rests with the Palestinian people. This is exactly what I’m saying.
PELLEY: What would you do, sir?
AHMADINEJAD: What I’m saying is that you should allow — oh, please, let me finish my thought. What we are saying, our solution for Palestine is a humane one. We are saying that you should allow the Palestinian people to participate in a fair and free election and determine their own fate. Whatever decision they take, everyone should go with that.
PELLEY: And if that decision . . .
AHMADINEJAD: No other party must interfere. We are not telling the Palestinian people what decisions they should take. Let them make their own decision. Whatever decision they take, we will go for that.
PELLEY: And if that decision is a two-state solution, you’re good with that? You could support a two-state solution?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, why are you prejudging what will happen? Let’s pave the ground first for a free and fair choice. And once they make their choice, we must respect that. All the people, all the Palestinian people must be given this opportunity, allow them to make their own decisions. Let us not tell them what course of action they need to take.
_____________________________________________________
5. Ahmedinejad tells Pelley that Americans and Europeans and Israel should abide by the fundamental principles of Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty first before fulminating and threatening war against Iran which is a non- nuclear bomb country that the IAEA has cleared. … Pelley then tries desperately to show Ahmedinejad as war monger and monster. His ploy backfires because Ahmediniejad is articulate, informed and humane ( unlike bozo Bush) and comes through looking like a saint. So much for the vaunted “smartness” of AIPAC and its drones such as Pelley.
SCOTT PELLEY: You have said in the past that you have 3,000 centrifuges in a line producing highly-enriched uranium. Do you have more now?
MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: No. Our plan and program is very transparent. We are under the supervision of the agency. Everything is on the table. We have nothing to hide.
PELLEY: Transparent? Sir, it’s been hidden for more than 15 years. You’ve been operating a secret nuclear program. It’s nothing if it’s not secret.
AHMADINEJAD: Who is saying that?
PELLEY: Well, the IAEA. You’ve, in fact, agreed with the IAEA to confess what you’ve done in secret over the past years. It is not transparent, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Very well. I think that you are not familiar with the structure and the laws and the regulations of the agency. The agency is supposed to do two things. One, supervision. The other, support for the member states. The agency is supposed to supervise and ask questions and we respond. Interestingly enough, in all agency reports, you will read that there are no signs of diversion on the part of the Iranian people. In no reports!
But naturally, the agency has questions to ask. And when it comes to that, interestingly enough, compared to European countries and other countries, the questions they ask us are far fewer. They have scores of questions to ask other countries. But the U.S. and a number of other countries are politicizing matters. They don’t want us to progress, to develop. So maybe it would be best if you ask the agency how many questions they have asked the U.S. and European countries for that matter. Scores of questions. Because they are producing bombs, new generations of nuclear bombs, they are fabricating those. And our activities are very peaceful under the supervision of the agency. We have provided the largest amount of cooperation to the agency. And what we are doing is very transparent.
PELLEY: For the sake of clarity, because there is so much concern in the world about this next question, please give me the most direct answer you can. Is it your goal to build a nuclear bomb?
AHMADINEJAD: What are you driving at?
PELLEY: Simply that, sir. Is it the goal of your government, the goal of this nation to build a nuclear weapon?
AHMADINEJAD: Do you think that the nuclear technology is only limited in a bomb? You can only build a bomb with that?
PELLEY: No, I appreciate the differences, sir, but the question is limited to the bomb.
AHMADINEJAD: It has different uses. Well, you have to appreciate we don’t need a nuclear bomb. We don’t need that. What needs do we have for a bomb?
PELLEY: May I take that as a “no,” sir?
AHMADINEJAD: Please, let me finish my thought. It is a firm “no.” I’m going to be much firmer now. I want to address all politicians around the world, statesmen. Any party who uses national revenues to make a bomb, a nuclear bomb, will make a mistake. Because in political relations right now, the nuclear bomb is of no use. If it was useful, it would have prevented the downfall of the Soviet Union. If it was useful, it would have resolved the problems the Americans have in Iraq. The U.S. has tested new generations of bombs, many thousands of warheads you have in your arsenals. It’s of no use. And also the Zionist entity, they have hundreds of warheads. It’s not going to help them. The time of the bomb is past. The parties who think that by using the bomb you can control others, they are wrong. Today we are living in the era of intellectual pursuits. You should spend your money on your people. We don’t need the bomb. For 28 years we have defended ourselves in the face of enemy onslaught. Every day we are becoming more powerful. And, again, we don’t need such weapons. In fact, we think that this is inhuman. So can you please tell me why the U.S. government is fabricating these bombs? Do you want to provide a more welfare, happiness to the people through the bomb? Are you going to deal with global poverty? Or do you want to kill people? So our belief, sir, tell us and also our culture, because of these, we are very much opposed to the killing of people. This is very clear.
PELLEY: You can show the world today that you are not pursuing a bomb. All you have to do is give the order. Open your nuclear facilities. Let the United Nations inspectors in there today and prove that there is no bomb program. Why not take that course?
AHMADEINEJAD: I think that you are a little bit behind the day’s news. You might have been away on an assignment. I don’t know.
PELLEY: I’m familiar with the day’s news.
AHMADEINEJAD: The reports[of the IAEA] say that we have been complying. And they are inspecting all of our sites every day. What more am I supposed to do? So, I try to be as frank as possible, but . . . .
PELLEY: You’re opening the sites slowly over time, sir. People say that you’re just trying to gather as much highly-enriched uranium as you possibly can.
AHMADEINEJAD: No. No. No. Well, should you say this, make these accusations or agency inspectors? Inspectors have said, that we are saying that Iran has not diverted; there’s no diversion here, in other words. Again, let me repeat. We have not diverted from a peaceful path. This is what the agencies think. There is a solution here, however, a very simple solution. The countries that have atomic bombs should destroy their stockpiles. And that would make everyone happy. …
There are many countries which have the technology. Five or six have diverted from the peaceful path, road, rather. So those five or six should return to the correct path. If certain parties think that they have rights which go beyond the normal rights that any nation should have, that will be problematic. I think that the American government should appreciate that it is like any other member of the international community, respect the views of the agency. It’s very regrettable to see that certain U.S. officials have insulted the very clear positions taken by the[IAEA] agency, and they have lost their temper. And also they have made threats. They have attacked the director general of the agency. That is shameful. If you think that the agency is a reputable one, you should allow it to go ahead with its business. Why should you, or the agency, for that matter, repeat the words of the [US]secretary of state? Rather, what they need to do is report the facts, the truth. So the problems of the American politicians is …they want the rest of the world just to say “yes, sir” and go along with whatever they say. That is finished. It’s in the past.
Dear Mr. Bollinger,
As President of Columbia University you show signs of being a cruel and petty university president…
We should all write to Mr. Bollinger to express our dismay at his ignorance.
I certainly lack no contempt for Ahmadinejad. That said, Mr. Bollinger’s grand-standing was unprofessional and egoist, not to mention rude. Sorry, the whole “invite him to throw a pie in his face” is just plain immature.
I think Noam Chomsky had the right idea when he stated that its no skin off of anyone’s ass to criticize (without facts, historical knowledge, context or understanding) our ruler’s enemy-of-the-month.
However, it takes much more courage (and systematic thinking) to critically examine the government and economic elite of one’s own country.
Because the U.S. is vastly more powerful than, for example, Venezula, and Iran, and -unlike those two nations- the U.S. elite has aggressively attacked country after country, it makes more sense to focus on this very destructive elite. Its actions are world shattering.
The U.S. elite will support nations that brutally subordinate its female population (Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Guatemala), it does not give a damn about gays here or abroad, it will overthrow democratic governments (Guatemala, Iran, Chile, Haiti, and the recent attempt in Venezuela), it does not give a damn about the poor or exploited here or there; instead, it focuses on the prize -more wealth and power.
So, if you want to get intangled in name-calling with respect to various Third World leaders, that is your waste of time. It doesn’t have anything to do with the foreign or economic policies of the elite. You have very little control over these policies.
Fake moral outrage, crocodile tears and name-calling are sops thrown to the suckers.
The MSM functions to amplify these sops in order to justify the amoral actions of the elite. And they are very conscious of what their interests are.
One wishes that Ahmadinejad had had the wit to respond to this boorish ass Bollinger as Nikita Khrushchev responded to Los Angeles mayor Sam Yorty in 1959. In introducing Khrushchev, Yorty indulged in some grandstanding based on K’s famous pulled-out-of-context 1956 statement “We will bury you” by chiding K that we will not bury you and you will not bury us. K responded by pointing out that his statement had been sufficiently clarified and accepted, then said “I trust even mayors of American cities read newspapers.”
Ahmadinejad missed a superb opportunity to crush a homegrown American jackass.
Dear all,
As a Columbia grad student I can tell you with some certainty that the attendees of the event cannot be characterized as having come in droves to execute verbal injustices.
While certainly unkind words were lobbed at the Iranian president, not least by our university’s president, in general our student body has reacted to Bollinger’s lack of diplomacy in the same way as the columnist.
Just this morning in my diplomacy class I remarked that Bollinger could benefit from taking the class himself!
While I can’t excuse his actions, I can say that he must be under some pressure, politically and economically (New York State Assembly hinted at withdrawing financial support from the university), to take a harsh approach to Ahmadinejad.
In conclusion, Columbia’s students’ attitudes do not mirror those of our president, and although Bollinger’s words are not excusable, it may be useful to understand why he behaved the way he did.
stinger_28,
gonna be off:
“(You know, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, CIA ‘rendition’ gulags in Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia etc…)”
As a matter of fact, there were no rendition prisons in Hungary. Probable reason must be the logistics and not our “brave” government (ass kissing idiots). We don’t have the right kind of buildings or airfields or whatever required.
Mr. Ahmadinejad, despite his faux pas, presented himself with what I consider to be dignity. Professor Bollinger did not. We are getting ready for war led by hatred that is worse than Nazi hatred–and perhaps spawned by Nazis. Who decided not to Taser Bollinger, or not to turn off his microphone, or not to allow him to be a genteel host? The Decider? Who is the puppeteer?
I hold Ahmadinejad in esteem for braving the fiery pit and the lions’ den. And I disbelieve the demonization campaign of Murdoch Media.
I couldn’t agree more with Bligh on his last post. I have learned from these posts and been challenged by some of the more thoughtful ones- then of course you have the knee-jerk responses such as Vern’s to my above post criticizing the Iranian President and the current fanatical regime:
“You are the idiot to think we should invade and bomb another country obviously, as made obvious by you amped up speech, as if we are so perfect by comparison.”
SAY WHAT!!! Obviously Vern feels that if you tell the truth about the oppression and injustice in a country then one must of course bomb and invade it! WOW – talk about some twisted logic. Perhaps a little less coffee there Vern. FYI:
I am 100% against bombing or invading Iran. I am and was against the bombing and invading of Iraq. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BODY OF MY POST.
Moving on, in the spirit of good discussion, I would mention to Richard Young that by the standards of International Law Israel and Syria are still at war- a war which Syria declared on Israel and from which the parties have never made peace. Secondly Syria, along with Iran, is resupplying Hezbollah in Lebanon with rockets and other arms- rockets which attach Israel on a regular basis. By International Law any country using another as a proxy is not a protected by the UN Charter- you cannot supply and train an army to fight your enemy from another territory and expect to be held unaccountable, morally or legally, by any International standard.
Now before Vern pipes in with a news flash that I support Israeli annihilation of all Arabs I would add, FYI: I am against the occupation of Palestinian Territories and feel that International Law clearly calls for the destruction of the Jewish Settlements and the return of land to the Palestinians. Furthermore I do believe that it is a correct statement that the Palestinians had nothing to do with the Holocaust yet are paying for it with their land and blood. They, as a people, have been dealt one of the worst hands in histories uneven game of chance. They were one of the most educated and professional people in the Middle East- many of them Christians. Now they dwell in sorrow and humiliation. We bare some of the blame. They bare some of the blame. The Arab countries bare a lot of the blame (they never made a nation for them when they had the land either). And of course Israel and the more strident religious expansionist powers there shoulder the lion’s share of the blame trying to fulfill a promise made in a book that also tells us the Earth is only 6000 years old. Also it would do many on these pages well to note that Israel has a very large and boisterous peace movement of its own, not to mention a much larger percentage of what most would consider “progressive” economic orientations than this country has ever possessed. Unfortunately, like here, fear is used to push people to accept things that they otherwise might reject.
I find Ahmedinejad to be alot more appealing than Bush. Does that make me a bad person?
Gandhi says: “I am not at all surprised at the way Bollinger behaved at the Iranian president. He represents the ARROGANCE and SELF-RIGHTEOUS attitude of Americans, even though the rest of the world is watching the American terrorist and genocidal activities in Iraq and other parts of the world.”
Gandhi, I ask that not put all people who disagree with you into one group and assume we are all the same. I ask that you not call us names. Please remember that 51% of Americans voted AGAINST Bush in two presidential elections, and that we are still furious that he stole those elections. Please remember that Americans voted in a new Congress last Fall in hopes of stopping the insanity of the Bush administration and its war in Iraq. Please remember that two-thirds of Americans are now opposed to the war in Iraq. I understand that there are Americans who fit the stereotype you describe, but most of us are not that way. I don’t mind at all if you call Bush arrogant and self-righteous. I will agree with you. But don’t say that about all Americans. It is not true.
I have not read ANY posts on this blog that support Bollinger. I do not support what Bollinger did or said. I have never mentioned war on Iran nor do I have ideas that there should be such a hideous thing. However, even a child can see that Ahmadinejad is manipulating us with his lies, just as Bush does. BUT THE POINT IS THAT I DON’T SUPPORT BUSH EITHER! I don’t listen to Bush, and I won’t listen to Ahmadinejad.
On this blog I have expressed my opinion that Ahmadinejad should not be trusted. I assumed it was obvious that Bush should not be trusted. Yet the blog is full of people defending Ahmadinejad in spite of the ridiculous lies he spews. If you really believe what he says about how wonderful it is to live in Iran, and you hate the United States so much, I have to wonder if you live in the US. If so, surely it must be difficult to live every day with people you hate so much.
I dream of an America in which we can join together to build a better place. I want to get rid of Bush and change foreign policy to earn the respect of the world. I hope that you will help me do that and be part of the resulting new diverse society. If foreign policy were left up the the people of America and the people of Iran, we would all be fine. The problem is that both countries currently have incompetent presidents.
Commondreams used to be a place where open minded people could meet and join together. I think we’re all in agreement in terms of the problems with US foreign policy. Why don’t we focus on what we have in common and use that influence to make changes? In fact, that may be why they called it “Common Dreams”.
Anyone with as much hate as Bollinger has is a sick puppie like other rightwingers.I’ll bet Bollinger is a republican his speech sound’s like it came right out of the White House ignorant and insulting. No one should have to wonder anymore why we lost all of our friend’s around the world smirking and arrogance do not friend’s make.
I will write to Bollinger and chide him, but I will also remember who the real enemies are: Bush, Cheney and that whole cartel that is getting oilrich off the blood of so many innocent people. Bollinger is just a willing victim of the hate these people throw around daily. Now in Canada the same nonsense has begin, first under the Liberals and now under the Conservatives we are being sucked into the Bush/Cheney black hole; join Star Wars, out yellow ribbons on your cars, give the military hundreds of PR men and our General Hillier says Canada’s military is “evolving beyond political control”. He thinks that’s a good thing and where do you suppose he learned how to do it? Yep. Good old USA. http://tinyurl.com/2z4z2z
I won’t let it happen here.
I am not defending Bollinger, he was tacky, trashy and rude. Much of the world saw and thought what most of you are expressing. We lost considerable prestige. He is an example of what Gandhi meant when he said “Western Civilization would be a good idea”.
But have you considered, or observed what is happening to professors who draw the attention of the neocons? There is organized intimidation of university faculty led by Lynn Cheney, wife of the supreme consigliari.
This chancellor of one of our best institutions of higher learning was trying to cover his posterior.
How dare the President of Columbia University call Doctor Ahmadinejad a “petty, cruel dictator.” Really…how dare him! I expected much more from a Ivy League University President than this false and pathetic description of the President of Iran.
Doctor Ahmadinejad may be mistaken on a few of his ideas, but a little common courtesy goes far in a supposed open forum and a place where ideas are exchanged without consequence. Plus he was invited by Columbia University only to have him disgraced? American hospitality rears its ugly head. Again, are not you ashamed? The propaganda machine was going at 100 kilometers per hour during this anticipated visit by Ahmadinejad. Yes?
While I appreciate those who defend the University and in their ignorance calling this slander justifiable, I just want to say that there were many people against Ahmadinejad going to speak there, probably most of the student body - as they are Americans. It is fine though to have this attiude. It is all too typical of the American mindset. Doctor Ahmadinejad handled this onslaught from so-called “educated” faculty and student body of Columbia University with grace and dignity. The social constructs of the USA praise hypocrisy ignorance and arrogance as virtues.
What does the ordinary American know about the Persian culture and 20th century USA Iran relations? Not much I would imagine. Yet, so many Americans want to invade Iran, including perhaps a few students and faculty at Columbia University, without even knowing what they are talking about. How can you ask someone about Iran society who is from Iran with preconceived answers? How would anyone know, prior to his speech, what Ahmadinejad would say or discuss? There were many assumptions and conclusion drawing and that was very shameful of faculty and students at Columbia University. So please do not act all innocent about this, especially when thousands of people FROM COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY protested your President’s invitation.
As far as limited role of women inside Iran, Iran is where they live and they are follwing the traditions of their society. Some of these traditions are centuries old. The women of Iran can leave if they want to. That country is not a prison. Is following the ancient traditions of Iran the law in Iran? Probably. But so what. Each nation has their own laws and some Americans truly believe the laws of Iran are unfair, although not knowing much about them. Yes the heads of women have to be covered and they are unable to perhaps have high-ranking jobs. Women can chose what kind of head covering to wear and they do have the right to an education and go shopping. Their head covering is treated like a blouse or a dress or high heeled shoes. I am sure there are many laws in the USA that some Americasn may believe are unfair. Remember also that it was just in the last century that women were granted rights in the USA and even then, women still are not treated equally to men over in the USA.
I think the USA society should first get their act together before being critical of Iran society.
AYMON: Thank you for posting the key points of the interview. I turned off TV nearly a year ago and had no way to view it. I recall seeing the Iranian president either on C-span (Washington Journal) or 60 Minutes a year or two ago when he wrote a very compelling letter to Bush. It raised many humanitarian points and impressed me. On the other hand, the status of women in Iran is deplorable. I applaud Ahmadinejad choosing to make every reasonable effort to present the case of his nation before what should be neutral eyes, a media interested in revealing Truth, not its Bush-sponsored-preset-agenda. As if that worked “last” time (in Iraq).
Certainly world opinion will NOT support any US aggression when the need is so clearly absent, when the nation’s symbolic leader is making obvious moves towards negotiated peace, and when Iraq is its own debacle stinking to high heaven. Generals could rebel, impeachment could get back on the table, peace marches could grow in strength, a national strike (and drive no where day) could mobilize media attention. A good deal is working against the neocons in their M.A.D plans. Let us pray.
Lee C. Bollinger should be FIRED. He shows the worst in Americans. Is it any wonder hatered for and of anything American is spreading like wildfire worldwide?
Lee C. Bollinger behaviour to a guest was coarse, common and vulgar - in short he achieved nothing except making President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appear statemanlike.
America has once again put its foot in it mouth in displaying such crudity to a visiting dignitary. Way to go America: you are spiraling very fast on a downward trend “down south”.
Sir Melvin Cleophus,
I don’t know where you live, but do not presume to understand the opinions of all Americans. You offend me. I am an American and not at all like what you describe.
How do know that “so many Americans” want to invade Iran? I don’t know anyone who thinks that. I do not include in my circle of friends anyone who has the kinds of opinions you attribute to all Americans.
Grow up……………….. SIR!
to ahro: ah, the evil jews again. Oh no, you meant the zionists. Because claiming that “the jews” are racists bigots would be somewhat … racist bigotry?
Maybe you should think for some minutes about the UGLY face that you are presenting. Or have you been in there and checked the IDs (and religion later of) of all the audience that was “mostly made up of jews”?
Hey all,
If you want to send a letter to Dr. Lee Bollinger, I have provided the address above. I just sent one to him this morning.
I think Ahmajinadad is the bravest, most courageous national leader in the world! And it used to be that universities weres the appropriate sites for debates, controversy & new ideas. Much thanks to Ahmon for the text of those interviews. I wish the MSM would allow readers to see the actual words of those our military-government judges are enemies. Would love to read Osama Bin Laden’s words. Salaam.
Rayberth,
So you agree with Ahmajinadad that the Holocaust was a myth?
Come on Rayberth, answer the question. Yes or No.
I happened to listen to NPR’s coverage of Ahmadinejad’s talk yesterday and was struck by the reporter’s one-sided story. There was no comment on the inappropriateness of Mr. Billinger’s introduction to Mr. Ahmadinejad. No matter how controversial a speaker may be, once you have decided to invite him or her, one should have the decency of introducing the guest at least in a neutral manner.
I was somewhat (but not hugely) disappointed at NPR. I used to be a member of NPR. But since the start of the Iraq war I have canceled my membership. At that time I had recognized NPR’s inability or unwillingness to provide real journalism, which should be questioning the power. At that time I never heard any interviews on NPR with non-pundits (like Noam Chomsky, Scott Ritter, Howard Zinn, to name a few).
Since then I am no more an NPR member. I fear for the future of our country - there is no opposiition party, there is no free media (not even NPR), and “progressives”are unwilling to recognize the troops for what they are, i.e. perpetrators of war (crimes).
Considering the ignorance and the inability to confront the reality of my countrymen, I am not at all hopeful of our country’s future.
By the way I sent letters of protest both to NPR and to Mr Bollinger at bollinger@columbia.edu
I’d hate to be the one to break the perfect record of nothing positive said about President Bollinger; but, I’m suspicious of all the talk about manners. What is this, Edwardian England?
The great thing was that the discussions happened. As a result of them we are, hopefully, further away from, not closer to war with Iran.
dmia
A quick few hints on how to translate Ahmadinejad:
When Ahmadinejad says something like, ‘People think that things will never change. But here in Iran 1979 showed us that things can change. Ten years later people in the Russia saw that much can change. Today we see that the regime has changed in Iraq. And in Israel the regime will some day change.’
Translate this as, ‘Israel should be wiped off the map.’
When Ahmadinejad says something like, ‘ The holocaust in Europe has been raised by the West to the level of a myth that is used to justify everything that Israel does.’
Translate this as, ‘The holocaust is a myth.’
Try it, dmia, on a few of the out takes from Ahmadinejad’s words of the last couple of days in New York. Who knows, you could even get your own talking heads show on MSNBC or CNN.
johnwyclif,
I’ve seen 4 different translations of those statements and none of them look like what you have quoted. Where did you get those quotes? The KKK?
John, this is a translation provided by the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting IRIB News Service:
“The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world,”"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land,” “As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map,” said Ahmadinejad, referring to the late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini.”
To johnwyclif et al.,
I would sound very, very foolish if I were to come onto this messageboard and say, “Hey everyone, quit critiquing Bush so much! He just wants to free the Iraqi people and has no interest in controlling oil or anyone’s political process! Here are some quotes….”
Taking at face value what those in power say, especially when it seems contradictory to OTHER things expressed by the same person at an earlier date, is just plain foolish. How did you get to the point where you looked beyond what you were told and realized that our society in the U.S. isn’t what you’ve been taught? By questioning those in authority, their motives, their actions, etc. How can you not apply that with Ahmadinejad?
Again, I’ll say that to be a progressive or Leftist means that you not only ruthlessly critique our homegrown oppressors, but stand in solidarity with those fighting in other countries. There are two worlds in each country, and by building a resistance against our rulers we need to also create ties with our brothers and sisters in the Other America, the Other Iran, the Other Israel…
I must add now that anyone treating Israel as some monolithic society without internal differentiation or resistance is either purposely doing it because of some hidden agenda, or hasn’t done the work to uncover a reality that the mainstream capitalist media hasn’t told them about. Some of the bravest anti-Occupation activists are those in Israel that break with the ruling powers and express solidarity with the Palestinian people. Women in Black, the Refusenik movement, Bat Shalom; the list goes on. In short, I’m urging those of us in the movements here in the U.S. to be consistent and see that we are not alone, and to build international ties that encourage liberation, and to not express uncritical support of whoever the U.S. government is condemning at the moment.
bottle,
When you invite someone to your house for dinner, when they walk through the door, do you spit in their face? There is something called academic professionalism, and Lee Bollinger needs a lesson in it. Again, no matter how much you disagree with someone, if you invite them as a guest speaker, treat them with dignity. Don’t insult them, especially in an introduction and before they have had an opportunity to speak. The introduction does not have to be sophisticated and laudatory. When the question and answer session arrives, then by all means, let your anger and frustration fly. Dr. Bollinger embarrassed the academic community and watchers and listeners of the forum. He should apologize.
Here’s where you can contact these jerkoffs. Tell them you represent a foreign government and only want to participate in their program when Bollinger learns some manners …
http://www.worldleaders.columbia.edu/about.html