Ahmadinejad's Less Than Warm Welcome To Columbia University
By Nicole Belle Monday Sep 24, 2007 5:30pm
There are many things for which to find fault with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. His own people are fairly discontented with his presidency (largely for economic reasons), the treatment of homosexuals, intellectuals and other dissidents offends any person who values human rights (although to be fair, aside from economic issues, perhaps, much of the blame should be laid on the shoulders of the mullahs), and his tendency to do all but taunt Bush to bomb him could fill several heated blogs, to name but a few.
However, like him or not (and I don't), Ahmadinejad IS the head of a foreign state invited here to speak. That's why Columbia's Dean Lee Bollinger's scathing opening statement was so shocking in its rudeness. Can you imagine the outcry if Bush had been invited to give a speech at a foreign university and gotten that kind of reception? Can you imagine how this looks to other countries?
Our buddy Bill W. made this little mash up of Bollinger introducing and Ahmadinejad responding.
Download | play 
Download | play
Huff Po, Booman and Rick Perlstein offer some other takes on Bollinger.
Login or Register to post comments.
When the other nice guy was President of Iran, we (the US gov't) said he had no power, the Ayatollah had it all. Now that Mr. A is in power, the gov't makes him out to be the all-powerful head of the state, deserving of vilification.
We suck.
the iranian people are dicontent with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over their economy. take a look at the U S $. it's worth less than the canadian $ today. we have months left of bush abuse and our economy is about to go into a recession.
I am listening to the Iranian president at a news conference right now. He is acquiting himself fairly well in the face of hostile questions, many from various groups that at least believe that they have greivances against Iran. They even had Elian's (the soldier kidnapped by Hezbollah) ask him a question -- which he didn't answer.
It would be interesting to put Bush in such a situation.
He said of Columbia that they "needed practice (as we all do) in learning to listen to other points of view." He thanked the faculty and students.
http://whaven33884.blogspot.com/2007/09/george-bush-has-only-himself-to-...
He just invited all of the journalists to come to Iran to interview him.
It was bizarre. Invite someone to speak....and then insult them. What's the point?
Ahmadinejad may be a crackpot....but at least he has the balls to face a hostile audience AND take their questions. Can you imagine Chimpy ever doing that? Forget about speaking to a foreign audience....hell, he won't do it here, unless it's a fawning pre-selected group asking censored questions.
Yup, that's our strutting, tough guy cowboy.
Did anyone read Dana Millbank's piece on Ahmedinejad in the WP? what world does millbank live in??
And can an American on this board please tell me why Americans are so disrespectful and arrogant to everyone around the world? haven't they noticed that the world is changing? the era of superpowers is over. We live in a global economy where nations like pakistan and india now have nukes.
I watched the 60 minutes interview and was utterly disgusted by the questioning!! that reporter had no information about history or international affairs!!
when do you think americans will get "it"?
Christ, remember how Americans were in an uproar because Hugo Chavez called Bush the Devil in front of the U.N.? We came off looking like tacky, whiney hypocrites, that's all. We insulted him for what's going on in his country instead of challenging him to make those things we find objectionable go away...which is pretty hard to do when we've got secret prisons and the deaths of nearly 600,000 Iraqis on our hands!
anyone that denies the holocaust should be game for some knocks. i think he should have his feet held to the fire.
it amazes me that supposedly well informed journalists like Dana Millbank still believe that America can go around lecturing the world about democracy and human rights after it's illegal and disastrous invasion of iraq.
Ahmedinejad is not crazy and if you listen to what he has to say, alot of it does in fact, make sense!
Bush is crazy to think that he can still lecture myanmar, zimbabwe or iran. it's absolute madness.
Bollinger is the president, not dean.
Ok. this takes the cake. You do suck. you stupid mfer are proving the republicans right every time to you put your fingers to the keyboard.
What's with the crocodile tears for this guy? He's a despot, plain and simple. He was invited, he accepted. The Dean of Columbia DIDN'T invite him, and he obviously despises Ahmedinejad. So what? This is how you're supposed to treat despots. Now if only people would start treating Bush the same way!
Who the hell is the US to decide how other countries should conduct their business?? Just who elected the US to be judge and jury of the world?
I get a kick out of the US determining whether a nation should be allowed to have a nuclear program.
Guess I missed that vote.
If Ahmadinejad was kissing Chimpy's ass, he'd still be a ruthless tyrant...but he'd be OUR ruthless tyrant. Then all would be just peachy.
The dean of columbia needs to protect the donations from Jewish alumni (he did what he had to do)
Ahmedinejad has said this of the holocaust: palestinians did not cause it. It was europeans. So, why are the palestinians paying for an event that they had nothing to do with? why didn't the british or germans carve out a piece of land for the jews who had been persecuted in Germany?
We Americans insist on rewriting history with ourselves as the heros. It might be true of every nation, I have only lived in this one so I don't know. Inconvenient facts get forgotten. If you ask Americans about Regan's shelling of civilian apartment buildings in Lebanon you will get puzzled looks. I have met people who thought that we won the war in Vietnam. Hell, even my mom was complaining the other day that the US should not have helped to overthrow the Shah of Iran! OK, she is getting up there in age but she was a teacher!
(For the historically challenged, the Iranian revolution started fairly shortly after President Carter went there to express solidarity with the Shah -- who we had just sold millions of dollars worth of military equipment to.)
When Bollinger does this with other problematic heads of state, including Bush, we'll be on the same page with you, DaveinRhodeIsland. In fact, Bollinger was playing to the pro-Israel mob outside.
He is a CIA installed sock puppet. Just like Hussein, the Shah, etc. We set up dictators and then knock them down. Wake up people.
"Now if only people would start treating Bush the same way!"
Now THAT'S the ticket!!!! Problem is, we supposedly have the freedom to do this in America, but when we exercise it, we get shouted down and called 'traitors' or 'communists'--like communism is even still a fucking issue anymore!
The Democrats we elect to speak up for us, fold like Target beach chairs and help the Republicans pass condemnations against our grassroots organizations like MoveOn...which they gladly take election money from other times!
Bollinger was under fire all week for this, and he spent the whole time defending it is a forum for free speech, for students to have the opportunity to question a controversial (to say the least) world leader about his statements and actions. What better way to hammer the point home than to set the tone like this? What would be the point of such a forum if the important issues surrounding this man would be off the table for discussion?
In looking at the two 60 minute interviews and this ad hominem laced invective presenting false choices Ahmadinejad is 3and 0 in looking better than his inquisitor's/attackers.
The way they twist this guy's words it is no wonder there is little hope for peace. When he said "there are no gays in his country" they conveniently left off the part "like you have in your country" which is open for many interpretations and a follow-up to try and understand what he was alluding to about gays in his country. Much like their restrictions on dress, tatoos, etc. the gays just do their thing only not openly like here.
He also clarified where he was coming from with Israel. If the regime there allowed the Palestinians the rights Ahmadinejad calls for it would be interesting to see the Arab world's and Iran's reaction. Unfortunately the Zionists will never allow that happen to see. If it is a bluff it needs to be called. Only then we will know if it is hate or a cause.
THANK YOU, Nicolle! Exactly what I thought, every word of your post. Rudeness is for children...Mike@12, I'm looking at you.
The one good that will come of Mr Bollinger's tongue-lashing is to get the GOoPers to stop whining about Columbia hosting Mr Despot. Well, no...I guess no-one can stop a righty from whining. Ah, well.
Who relies more on reason, Bush or Ahmadinejad.
Bonkers @ 22:
Oops! Look at that...I made an email link by accident...
Generally the definition of a despot doesn't include people who are elected. If we overuse words, they lose their meanings. Chimpy is not a despot, and neither is the elected President of Iran. They may be bad people, and they may even be thinking of becoming despots some day but they are not now. A lot of what we don't like about both Iran and the USA is outside of the control of either man -- Ahmedinejad doesn't write Iranian laws and Bush only thinks that he writes the US ones. In both cases there are large numbers of people who like the way things are because they voted for them to be that way.
If Chimpy refuses to leave office, then he becomes a despot.
In Israel it's totally and uncategorically illegal for a Jew to wed a Gentile.
If Iranian leaders merit such a "welcome", then perhaps Israeli leaders do, too.
I *wish* more foreign countries would do this to bush.
Yeah, Columbia kind of ripped Ahmadinejad a new one, but what did he expect? I'm sure the invitation did not read "Please come to Columbia, where you'll be greeted with candies and flowers by all of New York."
Hear hear. Just because Bush is an idiot doesn't mean Ahmedinejad deserves to be treated with kid gloves.
Maybe if we had this kind of vigorous international debate, face to face, with responses, we wouldn't be knee deep in war.
But calling an orc anything but an orc is an insult to non-orcs.
I support the invite. I support the insults. I support Ahmedinejad's right to respond. I'd support Bush going to an Iranian university and standing up to the same treatment.
For all the complaints we have about Bush et al, Ahmedinejad is a thousand times worse (to his own people...not as a threat to the world or as a legitimate military target.)
If we DON'T engage in a vigorous, intellectually honest, gloves off way here then we'll be nose-walked into a war that will ruin us all, if that ship hasn't already sailed.
I spend more time outside Bubble America for life and work -- thanks to the Bush McConomy -- and some of this stuff is downright appalling for its infantile, simplistic posturing, regardless of one's ideology and personal politics.
Ahmadinejad's appalling stand on certain issues, believe it or not, isn't markedly different from a good dozen of Bush's BFFs that have been propped up (to the detriment of human rights and peace) and paraded in media as heroic allies.
What's astonishing is how acceptable this dumb-fuckedly stupid caricature of American knee jerk conservatism is domestically, and how ridiculous it plays even next to the favorite "insane" bad guys du jour the Bush Cheney Gang wag their flag-sock covered dicks at.
very poor judgment by dean shithead. lets let dean shithead address iranian students, IN iran.
i agree with this post
but first off everyone needs to know he has very little actual power in iran - and is a figurehead in a way
i hate how homosexuals and woman are treated in iran
the Persian people are Aryan descendants they are not Arabs and really most Iranians think they are better than the rest of the Arab world - and the young people of iran are very apolitical and could care a less about israel or the usa
i'm on the side of the young people of iran who are the future and will topple the religous nut cases in power
but all of the problems in iran are the problems Iranians must counter - let them rebel and kill all the ayatolahs if they want - i'll cheer them if they do
we have our own problem to deal with and his name is george w bush and his followers are the republican and democratic parties. it is the us that needs help because we really have a one party system where the corporations control everything. our right to privacy is under attack everyday. america is going to hell and the last thing we need is to play moral judge on a nation like iran that is awaking to their evil government as we are awakening to our evil government.
Head of State? No actually he's not. He has very little real political power, he's the elected figure head not the appointed Head of state.... kinda like a backward Monarchy with a little religion thrown in the mix.
Arrogant effing Americans. George Bush has not spoken to a hostile crowd ever in his entire life,let alone during his reign of terror. He would crumble and yell and pitch a hissy fit if anyone dared talk to him in that manner. I had to laugh out loud at the irony in my morning newspaper headline, (I am not making this up,really), speaking about Amadinejad:..."He bends the truth, Americans say"....My God. I cannot wait for 1/20/09.
Whatever @ 26:
I disagree for various reasons about Bollinger's duties to a foreign head of state, but the best reason is laced by Scott Paul:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002369.php
I think a possible result of Bollinger's remarks is overlooked: a defusing of the situation in this country. If he had done anything seen as "coddling" by the Right here (and that could have been nearly anything) there would have been an outcry louder than the MoveOn pantwetting. That would have fuled the Kristol, Cheney, Nutcase, Psycho ward in this country. They can't do tht now. These things matter temendously, IMO.
Not related, but enjoy...from the early 80s!
One of the hostile questions towards the Iranian President was the claim is that some students who booed him were arrested. (He admitted that he was booed but denied that anybody was arrested -- who knows given how any event in Iran is blown out of proportion.)
Somehow, I just couldn't get the image of all the people who have been arrested at Bush rallies out of my mind. Below is just a sample.
Columbia’s Dean Lee Bollinger said that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would not have the courage to address questions honestly, yet Ballessger is obviously playing to the right wing hate radio and intimidation administration fucks.
Pretty poor of him, lack of courtesy, intelligence and dignity.
The American delegation at the U.N. walked out.
Arrogant, fucking pricks...
the face of America!
gee we have been threatening this man and his country for years and it is intensifying he comes over here to state his side, he came here, not on tv but here, would bush go to iran hell no.
Actually, he ISN'T the head of the Iranian state. Ali Khamanei is. All the more reason the big whoop everyone is making over him is a joke.
and everything we are accusing him of hell we are doing it right this moment.
Mike @ 12:
This is a republican/democratic disinformation site now , happened about a year ago, DUH.
hic. . .
Prove me wrong, Richard.
Additionally, absolutely no civil marriage ceremonies are available to Jews in Israel.
All Jewish marriages performed in Israel MUST be orthodox and are overseen by rabbinical courts.
The disaster in iraq has exposed the choke hold that the pro-israeli lobby has had on American foreign policy for the last 60 years. i am very glad to see a book about this lobby sitting on the new york times best seller list (it is about time)
After trying to impose democracy in iraq and creating an utter disaster, americans should not even think they can still lecture anyone in the world about democracy.
Does bush honestly believe that anyone in the world is listening to him?????
what's difficult i guess because of my ignorance is whether to take him at what he's saying or to go along with the rest of the western world with the US leading the way and view him as a monster along the lines of sadam. I don't want as a liberal to get into the mode of defending this guy without really knowing what he's truly about. i do know from his interview that there were some truly outrageous and idiotic comments by him with regard to the holocaust; however, on the other hand with respect to nuclear power, he comments that what gives the US the right and power to have nuclear power and to deny it to other countries. that's one i've often asked myself. are we so self righteous that we just know that we will not misuse that power and lesser countries cannot be entrusted with that capability. fine if you're in the driver's seat, but what about "lesser countries." do we just accept the status quo because that's the way it is, or do we question and begin to ask of our almighty gov't why? these questions i fear need to be asked because the US is no longer on a pedestal, this country has engaged in a "preemtive war". and the american people just opened their mouths and drank of the jibberish that our gov't was passing out. at this point, very little will go unquestioned. if GW had a hand in it, then the motive and the action are suspect. That's where we have been driven to today.
Oh really? How many countries has he invaded? How many of his servicemen have died in the cause of an unjust war?
The guy is no saint, but I fear that you are falling into the conservative propaganda. When our media finds it necessary to outright lie about what the guy says you know that you have to tread with caution. Most people do not seem to realize that women not only have the right to vote, but they serve in the Iranian version of the Parliment. Women engineers outnumber the men (the men are skipping university to take high paying oilfield jobs.) Women can drive. Yes, the country enforces a stupid dress code but when I heard one Iranian activist waxing rhapsodic about how the Shah's men used to go into the country and force women to unveil at gunpoint I think I heard enough...
I am a attractive un(Iranian) homosexual. . . .
Rude? The man openly questions the well-documented facts surrounding the holocaust, declaring that more research needs to be done, and proclaimed that Iran doesn't have homosexuals. He presented himself like a self-righteous, rambling buffoon, much like your average wingnut. And just like the Bush regime, when pressed with direct and pointed questions, he embarasses himself in front of the world. Are we seriously whining about being "rude" to a fucking asshole? Are you kidding me? Just because George Bush and his mouth-breathing buddies are intent upon destroying our liberty, doesn't mean that the elected figure head of Iran, doesn't deserve to get dressed down in public, for his own public positions.
"the treatment of homosexuals, intellectuals and other dissidents offends any person who values human rights"
Have to wonder exactly Mr. Ahmadinejad position on this is philosophically different than Mr. Bush's? I mean, it sounds like the Republican platform to me.
Ahmedinejad has said that nukes should be eliminated by ALL countries.
Why is it ok for india and pakistan (a country undergoing political turmoil right now) to have nukes, but not iran?
why is it ok for israel to have nukes, or america, or france????
"an attractive. . . where's Truman?
The fact is Bollinger demonstrated the rudeness and ill-manners Americans are often accused of. He invited this man to his college and he behaved like a jerk. Ahmadinejad demonstrated much more poise and culture than the President of one of our foremost universities.
I have no use for Ahmadinejad, but I do know that the propaganda machine is out in full force and we cannot judge his views by listening to our leaders, because our leaders are liars, too. We must hear Iranians to judge their motives. Our government's motives are not pure.
Nicole Belle:
Bush? At a university? Answering questions?
... imagination malfunction... irony meter broken....humor unit causing pain...unable to formulate snappy reply....
To all Americans:
outside of America and western europe, homosexual acts are performed in extreme privacy. The rest of the world, especially the developing world is extremely conservation on this issue.
nm @ 7 & 10-
I watched the 60 minutes interview and was utterly disgusted by the questioning!! that reporter had no information about history or international affairs!!
Have ya seen the interview Ahmadinejad gave to Charlie Rose?
http://www.charlierose.com/home
Rose is ten times the interviewer Pelley is. Rose is informed, his questions are balanced. Ahmadinejad was still very evasive.
Ahmedinejad is not crazy and if you listen to what he has to say, alot of it does in fact, make sense!
No, some of it makes sense. Specifically, when he shoots down Bushco's reasoning fer hostility towards Iran.
Remeber, Ahmadinejad is the figurehead for a theocracy, and a theocracy that falsely claims that it's a democracy. Iran supports its fellow Shi'ia in Lebanon, Hezbollah, arming that organization against the Sunni/Druze/Christian coalition government in Beirut as well as attacks against Israel- fomentin' the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in '06.
And that remark about there bein' no homosexuals in Iran(durin' the Columbia appearance) would be laughable if it weren't so fuckin' frightenin'.
But yer correct: Bush is crazy. But that doesn't make Ahmadinejad sane.
If you want to go on about Israel, how about the fact that people from Gaza or the West Bank are not allowed to marry Israeli citizens.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=3989
Now this is not about relative evil. We do not have to prove whether Iran, Israel, or the USA is the worst country. The real question of the hour is if there is something about Iran that makes it necessary for us to attack them. Some in this country seem to think that if the Iranian President denies the Holocaust, his entire country is therefore fair game for another one. I reject that.
Greig Byrne @ 9:
Actually it is important to note that he says he does not deny the Jewish Holocaust... he takes issue with the numbers somehow. I'm not sure if it's the number of non-Jews or the number of Jews, but in any event, he does not deny that it happened. In fact, he asked that if it was Europeans (Germans) who perpetrated it, why is it the Palestinians are being punished by having their lands taken away to atone for it. Frankly, I wonder that myself.
There is one gay person in Iran and his name is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
I'm not interested in defending this guy.
What does interest me is this orchestrated effort by the American government,media and apparently its universities, to insult and embarrass the president of Iran.The march toward war has never been so transparent or so ignoble.I've never seen such a display of intellectual cowardice.
The argument should not be whether the Iranian President is a nice man or not, it should be whether that warrants our country bombing his.
Here are some questions:
Has Iran done anything worth getting bombed for?
If we go to war with them, will it be legal?
Because you dislike how a country is ran, does it give you the right to kill thousands of it's citizens and overthrow it's government?
Other than 'he said bad things', is there any other evidence that Iran is a threat to us?
Is that evidence more or less credible than the evidence we used to attack Iraq?
What does any of this have to do with peace?
Andy,
As someone here said: ahmedinejad said they are no homosexuals in iran like in america (or something like that) - which is very true. In most developing countries, homosexuality is not something you express in public.
What's wrong with supporting hezbollah? israel illegally invaded southern lebanon and hezbollah grew out of that chaos (it was southern shia lebanese who formed the group to fight israeli aggression)
Who else is iran supporting? the shia's in iraq. why? because the shia's had no weapons after the fall of sadam and they went to iran and said..."if you dont help us, the sunnis will destroy us".
And why were eastern european jews settled in the mid-east? why did the europeans (who did the killing in the holocaust) carve out a piece of protected land for them IN EUROPE??
Greig Byrne @ 9:
Grieg,
If you actually took the time to READ the transcript, you would see that Ahmadinejad accepts the historical fact of the Holocaust. What he objects to is the price that Palestinians have been forced to pay.
Learn to be a little skeptical when our government and press try to portray foreign leaders in negative light.
From the 60 minute reporter, the President of a University, the US delegation walking out in the middle of his speech to w and Condi not listening to his speech, it was a disgraceful spectacle.
They deserve to be hated but on the blogs we can show them we are disgusted with their behaviour and we are not them.
Our government can't be trusted by us or the world, so the world will listen to him and see how he was treated with total disrespect.
This accomplished nothing but further hatred.
transcript here
George @ 58:
You seem to be one of the most rational people on this thread.
greg,
you are absolutely right. why was palestinian land forcefully taken from them?? the palestinians had nothing to do with the holocaust.
FilthyHarry @ 51:
BRAVO!
I got a kick out of seeing one uptight, ultra conservative, religious wingnut after another slam Ahmadinejad for his country's position regarding gays.
Just classic.
His opening statement was an overreaction to the criticisms thrown at the University for even having a dialog with the man. We're going to have deal with this guy with sooner or later. We can't afford another war. Having dialog and seeking diplomacy ( anyone remember that f#*king word?) with this man is a must before we start sending Marines, dropping bombs, and borrowing more money from China to pay for another conflict/occupation/resistance/mess!!! What was the goal of his visit? Was to have a dialog? Do Q/A? To enlighten or just to trash? Was it supposed to be a roast? The man is a HEAD OF STATE and agreed to talk and take questions from the audience. Honestly, the audience reaction ,questions, and post analysis would have provided all the necessary contextual framework for the man's hypocrisy and bellicosity. It was quite an unnecessary and drawn out opening statement.
http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/columbia-university-and-evi...
Legalize @ 50:
actually, he doesn't question the fact of the holocaust, asshole. he objects to the fact that innocent Palestinians have been forced to be the permanent BoatPeople, a population without a land, because of no fault of their own.
Go read some Edward Said.
what israel is doing to the palestinians is very similar to what the boers did in apartheid south africa to the black.
mort zuckerman is losing ground with his pro-israeli propaganda pieces.
Personally I enjoyed the attempt at straight talk and calling out the Iran President. Bollinger said at the start that we call out our government leaders all the time. This never ending game of everybody smiling ... speaking lies... and then going right about their dark business is old old old. Lets start calling things like they are... lets call out bush for being a coward for not meeting with the Iran President and call out the Iran president for his bigotry and refusal to take any blame for anything.
Lets stop kissing these peoples asses as they lead us into disaster.
Whatever @ 45:
You're right that there are no civil marriages available in Israel and that all Jewish marriages must be performed by Orthodox rabbis who will not marry a Jew and a Muslim (or an Orthodox Jew and a reform Jew). Imans in Israel can marry Muslims but the Imans will not marry a Jew and a Muslim. However Israelis can go to another country, marry there and Israel will then recognize the marriage even if between Jew and non-Jew. This is not illegal (and trips to Cyprus for this purpose are routinely done- there are package vacation/marriage trips routinely advertised in Israeli newspapers). In fact, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled this year that the state must register a same-sex marriage performed outside the country. To say that it is uncategorically illegal for a Jew and a Gentile to wed, as you stated, is therefore untrue.
Brian Lehrer of WYNC interviewed Bollinger today. Listen here... http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/2007/09/25. I don't accept Bollinger's explaination btw.
He doesn't take issue with the numbers, as far as I can tell from the translations he takes issue with the focus exclusively on the Jews who died and the use of the Holocaust as the trump card in any dealings that Israel has. A large number of non-Jews died in the Holocaust as well, including Poles, Russians, and almost all of the Roma. There is an industry dedicated to enshrining the Holocaust as the greatest tragedy in history (we spend millions each year on Holocaust memorials in this country) when of course large numbers of people of other races have perished in Holocausts of their own. (Seen many Native Americans lately?)
A lot of people have an emotional investment in viewing the Holocaust as a great evil that arose out of nothing, when in fact the Germans were only applying a new technology to treatment that the Jews had recieved for hundeds of years. Ironically, the Crusades were equally hard on Jews and Muslims.
The "holocaust denier's" conference that he called was in response to criticism of Iran's censorship and jailing of journalists. He was trying to call attention to the fact that historians are jailed in Europe for "denying" the Holocaust, or even disputing the magnitude of it. (What difference does it make if it was half a million, six million, or twenty million?)
This sort of stuff plays well in the Middle East. Remember that the President of Iran has his own goals, and they are not to please progressives in this country. He feels (wrongly in my opinion) that he is actually safe from attack by the US so he has nothing to lose by taking a more confrontational approach. His approach has, in fact, changed the rules of the game to Iran's advantage in the short term. We are demanding that they suspend enrichment and offering incentives for them to do so. If they suspend enrichment, then Iran's nuclear program would be back to where it was in 2000 when they had a voluntary suspension and were not offered incentives to continue so doing.
why is the iranian president a bigot?
it would be like someone calling an african president a bigot for opposing the apartheid regime in south africa!
ahmedinejad is pro-palestinian. does that make one a bigot?
For a minute I thought he was introducing Bush.
Richard:
Like I said, In Israel it is completely and absolutely FORBIDDEN for a Jew to wed a Gentile.
Mr Lee Bollinger you exhibit the sign of a smelly intellectual wanker. You cite and endorse the words of US officials & their anti Iranian propaganda ,limiting yourself to a shadow of a pro-governmental propaganda echo chamber. "the revulsion at what you stand for ,state sponsor of terror, misusing of sciences,humanity capacity for evil", are you projecting you hypocritical ass faced clown.You talk about intellectual courage. where is yours in regard to the revolting attitude of your own government who promotes and is engaged in state terrorism, war crimes, torture & physical abuse of prisoners, and the illegal detention of foreign nationals, as we speak. At least the Iran president had the courage to face an unfriendly and critical public, and stand by while listening a litany of insults, before personally responding to the most biased questioning. In his 8 years of embarrassment, George Bush never had the guts to do that. If The president of Iran has the monopoly on lunacy, Bush is on a 50-50 share base with him. Monopoly of nuclear terrorism, Iran has the right to develop and possess nuclear technology, and i hope they'll get their nukes before you filthy Americans have the opportunity to invade yet another country and slaughter hundreds of thousands of collaterals.......in Arabic, science is the means to rescue man from ignorance, Mr Lee Bollinger you really need a big dose of science right up your infected rectum.
the armenians suffered a holocaust. what country was carved out for them?
the kurds? where is their country?
the tutsi in the congo and burundi? where is there country? should they be repatriated to romania? can we carve out some land for them there?
I get suspicious of people who talk about science and reason and then inject the word "god" or "almighty" or "truth" into every other sentence. I don't like theocrats. Granted, he's a smart man... he's probably just playing upon his base... his radical fundamentalist islamic base... just as Bush panders to his radical fundamentalist christian base.
Oh, and that comment about how there are no homosexuals in Iran... and the audience just laughing at him...
hahaha... that was priceless. This was the smart move. Let him speak, but don't hesitate to ridicule him.
P.S. Have you ever read the stories about what happens to homosexuals in Iran???!!! Consentual sodomy is punishable by death.
wikipedia cites the "Boroumand Foundation" in saying that at least 107 people were executed for gay crimes between 1979 and 1990. So if Ahmadinejad is so sure Iran has no homosexuals, then who did they execute?
Bollinger told the truth. Ahmadinejad is a brutal, tinpot dictator.
Under this man Iran executes gay people. Hello? This on top of arresting people who dare speak their mind, closing newspapers, etc.
This is not a nice person. This is not a nice regime. We do not have to be nice to them.
Just because we on this blog hate bush (and rightly so) doesn't mean that we have to embrace everything Bush loathes. The enemy of our enemy (metaphorically speaking, Bush) is NOT our friend.
The knee-jerk rush to do whatever the opposite of Bush does is incredibly silly and childish. In this case, in crying about being 'rude' to a brutal dictator, that knee-jerk reaction is truly morally repugnant.
bollinger@columbia.edu
Your wrong on this one John. Bush, as bad as he is, does not preside over the hanging of gay teenager's. Then states that gays don't even exist in his country.
This guy is a monster and deserves to be called one. Rudness and all.
Don't let the fact that conservatives hate him confuse you. The kind of theocracy Mahmoud favors in Iran is well beyond the kind of stuff that would make Republicans pee their pants in our country. Oppression of women, blasphamy as a crime, sharia law, etc. Every enlightened liberal mind should be as disgusted by this guy as the most backward politician from our country.
Also, just because it is impolite doesn't mean it is wrong. An impolite listing of their faults is the least of what horrible leaders like Ahmadinejad and Bush deserve. Reflexively sticking up for horrible people just because right-wingers hate them doesn't make much sense.
Americans don't get it:
in many parts of the world, homosexuality is viewed as a perversion, punishable by law (as it was in america at one time). it's just where the majority of the world is TODAY.
Columbia looks stupid.
Go to the trouble to invite the head of a state and then take ten minutes to insult him before he has a chance to speak. REALLY dumb!
And why, to keep those Jewish endowments flooding in.
Now, because I have stated the obvious, let the hebrew bombardment commence.
As far as those of you backing up the Iranian president on the holocaust you should really read back to the way he used to talk about it BEFORE people started constantly hounding him about it... he talked just like any other prejudiced right winger arab... they as a culture DENY the holocaust. They get gasps in the middle east if they support the holocaust the same way you get gasps over here if you deny the holocaust. The Iranian president is simply changing his wording just like so many politicians do... He is a racist and his soft talk doesnt make me trust him one bit... and neither should any of you... of caorse he is dead on about the palastinians and how they should not have been put in this situation by the European zionists that invaded that area.
This guy is a lying bigoted right winger politician.
If I hear another petty tyrant described as the 'new Hitler' I'll bloody well invade Poland.
Legalize @ 50:
Ahmadinejad isn't the only one and research equals social castration or even jail time, just ask David Irving.
I do not deny the Holocaust but what is the truth? Some aspects of the Holocaust have become more folklore than fact.
Speaking of intellectual cowardice,read "Beyond Chutzpah" by Norman Finkelstein who also wrote "The Holocaust Industry".He documents how when Israel comes under international condemnation,another inevitable campaign is mounted alleging the "global outbreak of antisemitism".His main thrust however is in exposing Alan Dershowitz for the methodical serial liar that he is.
Ahmadinejad is a highly educated articulate men..he is a civil engineer who lectures at university.So when he comes out with a stupid statement that there are no gays in Iran, it stretches credulity that such an educated person would believe that. But then you have to consider the fact that he does NOT have political power in Iran (ayalotolah does)...he does not make nuclear policy for instance...regardless what Israel says.... and it is my opinion therefore that he was pandering to Iran's religious leaders when he made that ridiculous statement, and wants to be re-elected soon. He is in a sense more an ambassador for Iran. That's not to say he hasn't hurt Iran's standing in the world.
i am black and if you had asked me about the boers in apartheid south africa, i would have use the worst words to describe them. so, it doesn't surprise me when arabs do the same with israelis/jews, especially when they see how what their fellow palestinians are being subjected to.
Bonkers @ 22:
Bonkers-
I agree with Nicole here too. If this sounds like GOoPer whining, then so be it, but in the end, wouldn't it have been much better not to have invited the louse, than to invite him and then lash into him rudely?
Once again America the land where hypocrisy never rests, if it were for republicans and religious nut cases, Gays would be marched to re-education or their deaths.....
recently a republican congressman declared homosexuality punishable by death.....You don't need to travel to Iran.
For international academic circles this was a rather untypically harsh if not plain bigoted introduction for a foreign democratically elected president. When Bollinger got to the part where he starts wishing Ahmedinejad's party would loose after the event it just became infantile. It was all about Bollinger prancing around, acting tough while the big evil boogieman just sat there enjoying the simplistic and easily dodged accusations.
Not a big fan of the Iranian president here, but surely the news story should be that mister Evil himself handled himself and the public with dignity regardless of the hostile nature of the crowd. If the leader of the country that the US is about to attack will endure such a debate, surely the self-appointed leader of the free world can handle an actual critical debate - without handpicking the people in the audience - as well. There's plenty of hot issues to discuss, so whats the excuse?
getalife @ 65:
The last inkling of respect I had for the U.S. has been squeezed from my colon.
American arrogance and ignorance has run rampant in your society and you stand idly by.
I hope to see the Canadian U.N. delegation someday, walk out on your corrupt and lying leaders, with finger fully extended.
It is apparent that all hope for intelligent discourse is gone.
Rather than Ahmadinejad, it's Americans who are the lunatics.
We are more conditioned to homosexuality because it is constantly being exposed to it in our throats in our movies, radio, and tv shows. Other parts of the world it isn't as excepted.
President A. is bigger psycho than our own President WarPig. They both are way out of touch with reality. In a way they are alike but yet completely opposite. President A. is Twelver and President WarPig is a so-called born again Christian, both of which believe in a second coming of either Christ or the Twelfth Imam Hujjat Al-Mahdi. I think they are both trying to hurry a prophecy along quicker than most people would like.
What I don't get is why a President of a University would invite someone, especially a Head of State, to speak at their podium then publicly insult him before the guest even opens there mouth. Even after being insulted President A. continued with his speech. I think anyone else would have walked out. I can't help thinking it was some sort of stunt. What was this stunt supposed to accomplish?
nm @ 56:
Then, perhaps, Ahmadinejad should have made that claim. He didn't. Here's the exchange:
Mr. President, another student asks, Iranian women are now denied basic human rights, and your government has imposed draconian punishments, including execution on Iranian citizens who are homosexuals. Why are you doing those things?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Those in Iran are genuine true freedoms. The Iranian people are free. Women in Iran enjoy the highest levels of freedoms. We have two deputy vice -- well, two vice presidents that are female at the highest levels of speciality; specialized (roles ?) in our parliament and our government and our universities, they are present in our biotechnological fields and our technological fields. There are hundreds of women scientists that are active in the political realm as well.
It's not -- it's wrong for some governments, when they disagree with another government, to sort of -- try to spread lies that distort the full truth. Our nation is free. It has the highest level of participation in elections. In Iran, 80 percent -- 90 percent of the people turn out for votes during the elections, half of which -- over half of which are women, so how can we say that women are not free? Is that the entire truth?
But as for the executions, I'd like to raise two questions. If someone comes and establishes a network for illicit drug trafficking that affects the (use ?) in Iran, Turkey, Europe, the United States by introducing these illicit drugs and destroys them, would you ever reward them? People who lead the lives -- cause the deterioration of the lives of hundreds of millions of youth around the world, including in Iran, can we have any sympathy to them? Don't you have capital punishment in the United States? You do, too. (Applause.)
In Iran, too, there's capital punishment for illicit drug traffickers, for people who violate the rights of people.
If somebody takes up a gun, goes into a house, kills a group of people there, and then tries to take ransom, how would you confront them in Iran with -- in the United States? Would you reward them? Can a physician allow microbes, symbolically speaking, to spread across a nation? We have laws. People who violate the public rights of the people by using guns, killing people, creating insecurity, sell drugs, distribute drugs at a high level are sentenced to execution in Iran, and some of these punishments -- very few are carried in the public eye, before the public eye. It's a law based on democratic principles. You use injections and microbes to kill these people, and they are executed or they're hung, but the end result is killing.
MR. COATSWORTH: (Off mike) -- and drug smugglers. The question was about sexual preference and women. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: In Iran, we don't have homosexuals like in your country. (Laughter.) We don't have that in our country. (Booing.) In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it. (Laughter.)
[transcript here: http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/202820.php ]
So is it common and acceptable practice outside of western Europe and the Americas to start talkin' about the death penalty when someone asks about homosexuals? does the rest of the world just deny they have homosexuals?
Hell, in Indonesia they at least admit that there might be gay Indonesians. Sure, they consider it criminal behavior, but they admit that gays exist!
tia:
as countries become richer and it's citizens become better educated and more well travelled and exposed, things like homosexuality become more acceptable. it's no surprise that the level of tolerance for homosexuality is prevalent in the worlds richest places (america and western europe)
fiver @ 55:
Surely anyone suggesting that bush give a speech must be joking...At a University, College
or even a High School? Come on that is tooooo unreal. I mean after all, with his pop-up-
books he would be lost and reading "My Pet Goat" before a grade level above 2nd, would
not be appropriate...except in the case of bush, for that is about the maximum level
reading skill he has....and "giving an unrehersed speech" before an auidence that is not
hand picked would be devasting and a further embarrassement...He is a clown and belongs
in a Circus, caged up with the animals....I'm sorry, you animals don't deserve that either.
[...] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is, by all accounts, a religious extremist, a criminal, and a man who loves to agitate. Of course, the same is said of George W. Bush, and I’d prefer that he wasn’t introduced to audiences at major universities as a “cruel and petty dictator.” [...]
andy:
in many parts of the world, if you told people publicly that you were gay, they'd literally beat you up. It would actually be dangerous.
Many parts of the world are poor and poor countries tend to be a lot more conservative (heck...it's like the south in america! they're poorer and less tolerant)
James Bishop @ 89:
This Liberal Catholic is thinks you should write out your post using your favorite crayon, light it on fire and shove it up your............
Being polite at the wrong times is what makes democrats so worthless...
We are coming onto the end of the Bush term.... we all KNOW that the bushies are crazy enough to bomb Iran to pieces. We all KNOW this. It is time for someone to spark direct and open talk about the truth of things. Being polite is for some other time. Right now we ALL need to be calling out these world "leaders" and make them start talking about things in a truthful way not just double speaking all the damn time. If we want to fix these problems they must be talked about ... not hushed away because the are painful truths and it is "rude" to bring them up... The Iranian president has not problems calling out the zionists... and we should have no problems calling out him and accept the things he says that is true and expecting him to OWN UP to the things we say that are true even if it hurts his "feelings"....
Bollinger's comments were entirely appropriate. As for the notion that by "we have no gays in your country" he meant gays were just in the closet, human rights groups estimate that about 400 queers have been executed in Iran in recent years. Women are punished with violence, even execution, for being sexually active. Dissident scholars are harassed and jailed. We do indeed have to wrestle with the growth of our government's spying on its own people, on the increase in presidential powers, and our nation's bellicosity in general, but none of that justifies the urge in some comments here, and in Nicole Bell's post, to act as apologists for a regime that is repressive and totalitarian. Just because someone is an enemy to George Bush does not make him our friend, and none of us should be polite to a tyrant. We actually do have some values worth being proud of, and holding fast to. Bollinger's introduction was accurate, and represented what free speech in America is about. We can openly debate, without euphemism and denial. Iranians are not free to do that.
Pissed Canuck,I'm Canadian but I don't feel the need to condemn ALL Americans for "standing idly by".There are obviously millions of Americans who feel just as disgusted and and aggravated as you do.
Really - is this the best we can do for world leaders? Where are the grown-ups??!
by insulting the ELECTED president of iran, bollinger indirectly insulted the iranian peope who VOTED for him.
iran's government reflects it's culture. we have no right to tell iran what it's form of government should be or when and how they should tranform THEIR culture!
Whatever @ 80:
Whatever @ 80:
No, you're wrong. There can't be a legal marriage between a Jew and a Gentile which takes place in Israel but marriages between Jews and Gentiles which take place outside the country are recognized in Israel. Obviously, you were stating that there are no legally recognized marriages between Israeli Jews and Israeli Gentiles and that is not the case. No need to argue it further.
why is everyone so hung up on this gay issue? Get out of America people! travel to some 3rd world countries and you'll understand where ahmedinejad is coming from.
pissed canuck @ 99:
I agree, my country has lost it freaking mind.
Bollinger’s comments on the opening of the discussion with Iran's president seems to me to be an effort to curtail what he knew was going to be an onslaught against the univeristy for having this guest speak.
It is unfortunate that we live in a country where people like Duncan Hunter go after academic institutions for presenting differing points of view. And even more unfortunate that the university "PR" people feel they have to take pre-emptive action to disuade public recourse, led by the likes of Duncan Hunter.
nm @ 88:
Plenty of places in the US of A sodomy and non "traditional" sex acts even among consenting adults is illegal. Go to anywhere in the US of A, other than the 10% of the liberal/sane non land-locked parts, and try being openly homosexual and see what happens.
So if we want to talk backwards... in places like Oklahoma tattoos are illegal. Interracial marriages were illegal until not too long ago. Heck this is the same country that went into a collective fit because a female nipple was shown on prime time for like 2 seconds.
But yeah, let's focus on Iran's treatment of homosexuals while ignoring the fact that for the most of the past elections GOP politicians have achieved a lot of political mileage from voters whose single issue is the denial of equal rights to homosexuals.
Anyhow, I read on a French publication the best assessment regarding the childish and petulant behavior of the American establishment during the visit by Iran's premier: It takes an asshole to know another.
The right wing wacko Christians, the Zionist, and the Mullah's errands boy fail to realize is that at the end of the day they are all the same shit, different asshole.
nm @ 82:
To date, Israel has refused to recognize the Armenian Genocide. It's one reason their criticism of Ahmadinejad as a "holocaust denier" rings hollow.
shawn @ 42:
The irony of it all is that while Bush was speaking inside the UN about the right of the Buddhist monks to free speech and free assembly in Burma, dozens of anti-war protesters were being arrested outside the UN by the NYPD.
"..the level of tolerance for homosexuality is prevalent in the worlds richest places (america and western europe)"
On the whole you're correct, but I'd just like to interject that in South Africa, hardly one of the world's most prosperous and advanced countries (witness the AIDS fiasco), gay marriage (even gay marriage in jails) has been legalised, while here in good ol' intolerant bigoted USA, we have far far far more to go. In fact you could say that we got and deserve Bush because of Rove's exploitation of our intolerance against gays. Europe is way ahead of us, not only in terms of tolerance, but health care, education, infant mortality, longevity, a multitude of freedoms including truth in the media and freedom of speech (we taser young men at public gatherings for mentioning the word "impeachment").
It is the role of universities to speak truth to power, on behalf of the oppressed in Iran who are powerless and in place of diplomats whose professional mores forbid it. Unlike the international fora or the political podium, universities do not and should not provide a forum for unchallenged propaganda. If the President of Iran believes in the open forum to which he referred in his opening statement, he should have no issue with being challenged on academic grounds at an academic institution. President Bollinger fulfilled his societal role. Bravo.
The anti-semitism and other forms of ignorance in the postings above demonstrate that neither the President of Iran nor the President of the United States enjoy a monopoly on ignorance. It remains, unfortunately, part of the human condition.
Hilarious....Reading the absurd back and forth arguing which first century, middle eastern, shepard based, fantasy world doctrine is less barbaric.
"Sic Semper Tyrannis". Jews, Christians and Muslims alike. To hell (wish there was one) with every f-ing one of em.
(Ahhhh, now that felt good.)
Sorry folks-you don't extend an invitation to a foriegn leader to speak at your university,then sand bag him during the opening "welcome" speech.Debate is fine,and healthy,but this lack of basic protocol speaks to something quite insidious:
an open and orchestrated march toward war.
Further more, holding Ahmedinejad accountable for every law in Iran is about the same as giving Bush credit for writing the constitution (re-writing it, maybe). Iran is a democracy where the spiritual leadership is very influencial in the day to day operations of the state. It is an Islamic state, like it or not. And the President is not at liberty to create or reject laws as he sees fit. Unlike the system we now seem to have.
"the armenians suffered a holocaust. what country was carved out for them?
"To date, Israel has refused to recognize the Armenian Genocide. It’s one reason their criticism of Ahmadinejad as a “holocaust denier” rings hollow.
----------------
That's because the Jews perpetrated the Armenian genocide. It's terrible to deny the Jewish holocaust but OK to deny that of the Armenians?
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-Jews/+Doc-Jews-Holocau...
*
NM... you sure do cry alot, don't you? Go take a trip on over to Iran, I'm sure you'll love it there and be welcomed with open arms. The free world won't miss a wink of sleep with the likes of you missing.
Euro-oil-trading mechanism - Iranian Oil Bourse
Just Tell the Truth Bush!
"In 1971, as it became clearer and clearer that the U.S Government would not be able to buy back its dollars in gold, it made in 1972-73 an iron-clad arrangement with Saudi Arabia to support the power of the House of Saud in exchange for accepting only U.S. dollars for its oil. The rest of OPEC was to follow suit and also accept only dollars. Because the world had to buy oil from the Arab oil countries, it had the reason to hold dollars as payment for oil. Because the world needed ever increasing quantities of oil at ever increasing oil prices, the world's demand for dollars could only increase. Even though dollars could no longer be exchanged for gold, they were now exchangeable for oil.
The economic essence of this arrangement was that the dollar was now backed by oil. As long as that was the case, the world had to accumulate increasing amounts of dollars, because they needed those dollars to buy oil. As long as the dollar was the only acceptable payment for oil, its dominance in the world was assured, and the American Empire could continue to tax the rest of the world. If, for any reason, the dollar lost its oil backing, the American Empire would cease to exist. Thus, Imperial survival dictated that oil be sold only for dollars. It also dictated that oil reserves were spread around various sovereign states that weren't strong enough, politically or militarily, to demand payment for oil in something else. If someone demanded a different payment, he had to be convinced, either by political pressure or military means, to change his mind. "
Read it all here:
http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse...rticle11613.htm
http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/pub...cle_14125.shtml
Frankly, I may not agree with the opening by Lee Bollinger (in the context of opening for a foreign head of state) but it is freedom of speech, and it is to be granted to those on both sides of the debate, be they Ahmadinejad or Bollinger.
That they both gave their speeches is exactly what is right about all this.
While the women commenting may have been offended, others in the audience may have been offended by Ahmadinejad, its all ones perspective, and that is why freedom of speech is so very important and was on display at this university.
Excerpt from - Taking Oil out of the Equation
* * *
What would it take to refashion the war on terrorism in light of these fundamental realities? First, it means acknowledging that oil is not a neutral commodity in the eyes of many in the Middle East: Oil has too many associations with British imperialism and American economic power. If we keep turning to the Middle East for a large share our petroleum, we will keep stirring up local antipathies, and we will have to be prepared to deal with that—presumably, by keeping a very low profile.
Second, it means recognizing that we will continue to provoke hostility in the Middle East so long as we rely on military force to protect our oil imports and those of our allies. Whatever explanation is provided by Washington, the conspicuous presence of American troops and warships in the region will always be viewed by many as an expression of imperialism and dominance, and so will provoke bitter resentment—a sentiment that can easily be exploited by those seeking to inflict pain on this country.
Finally, it means distancing ourselves from entrenched, authoritarian regimes like the House of Saud that are considered overly friendly to U.S. oil interests and insufficiently attentive to the needs and concerns of their own people. Polling data suggests that the perceived intimacy between these regimes and Washington—an intimacy fueled by oil—is one of the most potent sources of discontent in the Middle East, and a main rallying cry for al-Qaida and its ilk. Moreover, our protestations on behalf of democracy in the region will never be taken seriously so long as we continue to prop up these corrupt and repressive petro-regimes.
Can we adopt a lower profile in the Middle East, distance ourselves from the oil regimes, and reduce our reliance on military force to protect our energy supplies? Yes we can—but only if we can gain greater control over our craving for imported oil. This means using less petroleum (through conservation measures, higher fuel efficiency requirements, lower speed limits, and so on), employing more substitutes (especially ethanol), and relying on mass transit. The greater our self-discipline at home, the stronger will be our capacity to fashion a new strategy in the Middle East—one that allows us to repudiate the Carter Doctrine and withdraw our forces from the region, thereby robbing the terrorists of their principal recruiting appeal.
No matter how hard we try, we cannot prevail in the "war on terror" so long as we continue to ignore the oil dimensions of the conflict. Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants understand full well that America’s presence in their backyard is driven by our addiction to Middle Eastern oil, and that so long as we do nothing to curb this addiction we will continue to embrace policies that will generate ever more recruits for al-Qaida. Only through self-discipline and the elimination of our oil dependency can we break this cycle and so win the war against terror.
Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College and the author of Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum (Owl Books).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How the USA meddles with the World
Some history:
-1953-US overthrows Iran Prime Minister Mossedeq of Iran. US installs Shah as dictator.
-1954-US overthrows democratically elected President Arbenz of Guatamala. 200,000 civilians dead.
-1963-US backs assasination of South Vietnamese president Diem.
-1963-1975-American military kill 4 million people in southeast Asia.
-SEPTEMBER 11, 1973-US stages coup in Chile
Democratically elected Salvador Allende assasinated. Dictator Auguste Pinochet is installed. 5000 Chileans killed.
-1977-US backs military rulers of El Salvador.
70 000 Salvadorans and 4 US nuns killed.
-1980's-US trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion. Oops!!
-1981-Reagan administration trains and funds "contras" in Nicaragua. 30 000 Nicaraguans die.
-1982-US GIVES BILLIONS TO SADDAM HUSSEIN TO FIGHT AGAINST IRAN.
-1983-WHITE HOUSE SECRETLY GIVES WEAPONS TO IRANIANS TO KILL IRAQIS. OOPS!!
-1989-CIA agent Manuel Noreiga disobeys orders from Washington. US invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3000 Panamanian casualties.
-1990-Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the USA.
-1991-US invades Iraq. Bush re-instates dictator of Kuwait.
-1998-Clinton bombs "weapons factory" in Sudan. Turns out the factory was making aspirin.
-1991-2003-Americans bombed Iraq on a weekly basis.UN estimates 500 000 children dead from bombings and sanctions.
-2000-01-US gives Taliban ruled Afghanstan $245 million in "aid".
Sept. 11, 2001-Osama bin Laden uses his CIA training to murder 3000 people.
"The major function of secrecy in Washington is to keep the U.S. people and U.S. Congress from knowing what the nation's leaders are doing."
"...the CIA has overthrown functioning democracies in over 20 countries"
"the CIA had been running thousands of operations over the years...
Yet another sorry example of the demise of civility in the USA. How glad I am I will never have to go there.
None of this would ever have been an issue but for the unrelenting campaigning by Israel-firsters to demonise anyone that gets in the way of Israeli middle-eastern hegemony.
Israel and their treachorous American supporters are wholley unprincipled in their manipulaion of US media and political system to spend American blood and tax=payers money on supporting this foreign entity, that brings nothing but misery to America and the world.
Richard @ 113:
That's untrue.
If an Israeli Jew weds a Gentile (only possible outside of Israel), their marriage will not be legal in Israel.
Period.
Israel and her rabbinical courts REFUSE to recognize any marriage that is not performed in Israel.
mystic @ 125:
mystic @ 125:
skycypher @ 127:
Whatever @ 132:
There is a lot Iran can be mad at the US for... After Iraq attacked Iran late 1980, the US positioned itself squarely behind Saddam Hussain, providing him with conventional wepons, as well as mustard gas and nerve gas. The same day as the UN announced that Iraq was using these chemical wepons against Iranian troops, Donald Rumsfelt went to Bagdad to show support for Saddam (this was early 1984, his second visit during the war).
But this is not all, the US participated directly in the war, attacking Iranian targets in the persian gulf for years, culminating in the cruiser USS Vincennes shooting down the civilian Iran Air Flight 655 with the loss of all 290 passengers and crew on July 3, 1988.
Sometimes the Iranian regime reminds us in the west of bunch of barbarian pricks, especially when it comes to the strict execution of sharia law in that country. But considering everything, no one can blame them for showing the US the finger, whenever they get a chance to.
BTW, that Bollinger guy made a complete fool out of himself. When you invite somone to your house, you treat him with respect (till he is gone at least). For a University Professor to behave like this is totally outrageous and the NY intelligenzia (if it exists...) should immediately go and cover him with tar and feathers, on the pain of letting the world think he is one of them.
You're mistaken. The rabbinical courts only need to recognize marriages performed in Israel. For marriages performed outside of Israel, they are registered with the state and are then recognized for all purposes. Read the Israeli Supreme Court opinion of March of this year which recognized a same sex marriage performed outside Israel.
I fail to see why heads of state should be treated with any undue deference. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is just the Iranian doppleganger of George Bush. They are both authoritarian demagogues who have built there political fortunes on exploiting religious prejudice and extremism. 3/4, or more, of the things that Bollinger said about Ahmadinejad could, and should, be said about Bush and his regime. Why should being a leader, even an elected one, insulate someone from criticism? It is not undemocratic or an insult to free speech to criticize a head of state. In fact, just the opposite. To call on people to treat demagogues with politeness and defer to them is to enable tyrants.
I think Columbia University was right both to invite Ahmadinejad to speak, and to subject him to harsh criticism. I would like, even more, to see Bush get some of the same.
Oh, and BTW, attempting to debunk the Holocaust is no more a legitimate subject of inquiry than is Creationism. Neither has anything to do with history or science and both are driven out of ideology with ideological goals aiming to undermine known hard facts, not the furtherance of knowledge.
the introduction of a speaker is not the proper time to be mounting verbal attacks on said speaker.
the question and answer period was the proper time.
bollinger was a buffoon and shamed columbia.
the university will much less likely attract such contraversial speakers again.
bravo.
what's more desireable? a dialog with a head of state that you despise or a war with his state?
q. e. duh.
What is wrong with calling Zionists for what they are. A racist supremacist destructive ideology, who abused and profited from the horrors imposed upon the Europeans Jews, Zionists stole the land of Palestinians and slaughtered thousand of them in the process, and created this apartheid like system in which they are treating Palestinians, the way Nazis treated Jews some 60 years ago. Is there anything anti-Semitic in what i just said?
DaveInRhodeIsland @ 13:
What the hell are you talking about? The man was ACTUALLY ELECTED! He isn't a "despot"...you really need to listen to something else besides US media...I suppose you think Cuba is a threat too....and don't forget Chavez...why truly evil....good god Americans really are stupid.
Space Coyote @ 83:
He said there is not an openly gay community in Iran like the west. If you check out the translation you have to admit that he was saying homosexuality is not out in the open in Iran, which is true.
nm @ 106:
Yeah, and if women in Islam don't wear the head-scarf/veil/burka they're just askin' to be raped, too. The law is only there to protect women, not make them second class citizens. Except those laws do make women second class citizens. And those laws applyin' to homosexuals makes gays dead citizens. 'Cause better dead than beat up, right?
Okay, agreed, the peoples of the world differ in many ways. Iranians haven't had their Stormin' opf the Bastille, their Runnymede. But I've had my fill of history courses and I know that Western Civilization springs forth from the Middle East.
That Arabs and Persians remained so conservative and so unwilling to respect the rights of individuals shows an unwillingness to mature as societies, imo, as opposed to a natural social evolution. Why, when a woman is totally capable of doin' so, is it illegal fer her to do so in Iran? That a man or woman wants to be physically intimate with another of the same gender precludes of bein' a productive member of any society- why?
Hatred of homosexuals and intellectuals? ...sounds like any right wing forum on the net, or any radio station on the AM dial.
south africa is a unique situation, especially in sub-saharan africa (where homosexuality is absolutely viewed as a perversion)
the apartheid system created a society that was more willing to be tolerant of differences among people.
south africa is also the richest and most developed country in sub-saharan africa.
Heliogabalus @ 139:
Yes, there is but it's not worth it to point it out to you. Nobody is ever cured of anti-Semitic or racist views by rational argument
fiver @ 118:
Israel recognizing the Armenian genocide would go against Israel's close ties with Turkey.
Nationalism is the problem. Why should we favor one group of ethnic nationalists (Palestinians) over another (Jews) or visa versa? The way I see it is to elevate one ethnic group's struggle over another's and to deny the legitimate fears and needs of either group is racist. There is no shortage of bigotry and irrationality on both sides of the debate.
Ahmadinejad is a violent wanker.
As members of the human race the least we can do to show our disapproval is scorn him.
Ahmadinejad seems like a bit of a whack job, but not as bad as our own president. Even if he did deny the holocaust (which I haven't heard him say - and I don't trust those who claim he said it), is that really any worse than denying evolution or global warming?
This guy is clearly the object of a worldwide demonization effort. I'm not saying he's a great guy, but the propaganda against him is enormous. It's very clear that someone is pushing hard for a war against Iran.
I wonder who that could be?
now that the speech is over, bollinger can go back to selling degrees to silver spoons.
Login or Register to post comments.