Dueling "professors"?

Two orders of business before I get to the subject title.

1.) The US House of Representatives .. that is very interesting. I'm glad Titus is keeping track of these prestigious visits. Undoubtedly we will soon find ourselves being plagiarized. Our ideas put forth in talking points and even bills submitted for law ... that's the "natural narcissism" by the way, that Titus correctly identified.

2.) Unlike the more well known but less prestigious Move On blog, I am relieved that the FBI has advanced search engines which flag sites like ours for review. Undoubtedly this is the type of "victimizing" Move On and the ACLU would claim is eroding our 1st amendment rights. They would be wrong. It is not the lawyers, reporters (or even bloggers) that protect free speech - it is the soldier, FBI agent and policeman.


Alright ... on to today's business.

Ahmdinejad's appearance at Columbia University.

First let me make a correction to my previous post on this subject (after all, we're not the NY Times, we don't bury mistakes below the fold on page 26). The president of Columbia is a man, not a woman. However, while this may steal the meaning out of my clever title (The Madam and the Madman), it does not change the substance of what I wrote - this man should have never been given this platform.


As to the event itself ... After tremendous criticism was heaped upon the university president and his supporters they began to bill this event as an opportunity to confront Ahmadinejad with the sort of tough questions he never faces at home. Was it a clever PR offensive? Perhaps. However, in reading the full text of the exchange (as I did) one realizes that Bollinger followed through, with force, on that promise. And while I still condemn his decision to allow this madman to have such a forum, I am intellectually honest enough to give him credit for that follow through. I submit for your review just a taste of the introduction by Lee Bollinger:


"Let's then be clear at the beginning. Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator. And so I ask you -- (applause) -- and so I ask you, why have women, members of the Baha'i faith, homosexuals and so many of our academic colleagues become targets of persecution in your country?"

"Secondly, the denial of the Holocaust. In a December 2005 state television broadcast, you described the Holocaust as "a fabricated legend." One year later, you held a two-day conference of Holocaust deniers. For the illiterate and ignorant, this is dangerous propaganda.When you have come to a place like this, this makes you, quite simply, ridiculous. You are either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated."

"The destruction of Israel. Twelve days ago you said that the state of Israel cannot continue its life. This echoed a number of inflammatory statements you have delivered in the past two years, including in October 2005, when you said that Israel "should be wiped off the map", quote-unquote. Columbia has over 800 alumni currently living in Israel. As an institution, we have deep ties with our colleagues there. I have personally spoken -- personally, I have spoken out in most forceful terms against proposals to boycott Israeli scholars (in/and ?) universities, saying that such boycotts might as well include Columbia. (Applause.)More than 400 -- more than 400 -- more than 400 college and university presidents in this country have joined in that statement.
My question then is, do you plan on wiping us off the map too? (Applause.)"

"A number of Columbia graduates and current students are among the brave members of our military who are serving or have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. They, like other Americans with sons, daughters, fathers, husbands and wives serving in combat, rightly see your government as the enemy.Can you tell them and us why Iran is fighting a proxy war in Iraq by arming Shi'a militia targeting and killing U.S. troops?"


"Let me close with a comment. Frankly -- I close with this comment frankly and in all candor, Mr. President. I doubt that you will have the intellectual courage to answer these questions. But your avoiding them will in itself be meaningful to us. I do expect you to exhibit the fanatical mindset that characterizes so much of what you say and do. Fortunately I am told by experts on your country that this only further undermines your position in Iran, with all the many good-hearted, intelligent citizens there.
A year ago, I am reliably told, your preposterous and belligerent statements in this country, as at one of the meetings at the Council on Foreign Relations, so embarrassed sensible Iranian citizens that this led to your party's defeat in the December mayoral elections. May this do that and more. (Applause.)
I am only a professor, who is also a university president.
And today I feel all the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for. I only wish I could do better. Thank you." (Cheers, extended applause.)

And brother, that was just a few excerpts. The man clearly was going to define this event on his own terms and I am heartened to see that the leader of one of our premier academic institutions has not been blinded by a hatred of all things conservative or Bush and that he still finds attacks against America and human rights violations appalling even if it puts him in a position of agreeing, however temporarily, with George W. Bush. So for his personal conduct in this event I give him credit.

Some of the students then went on to offer tough questions as well. BUT ... the problem with interacting with a skilled propagandist is that for all of the tough questions and accusations, not one of them will be answered. Sure, it makes Bollinger look good and perhaps saves his reputation regarding this issue, but what did it achieve? Listen or read the transcripts - there wasn't a single answer on these issues. It was replete with ten minute responses chalked full of the double speak we became accustomed to during the Soviet era. And even more disturbing was at times - especially in Ahmadenijad's initial defense from the introduction - the student audience gave wild applause in support of this butcher. And I understand Bollinger's point that his inability or unwillingness to answer these questions speaks volumes in and of itself - but the portions which will be shown on Iranian sate TV, Al Jazerra et al will be the thunderous applause Ahmad got from the students - and shamefully they wont even have to cut and paste that audio - it was genuine! I'll give you an example:

Ahmadinejad: At the outset, I want to complain a bit on the person who read this political statement against me. In Iran, tradition requires that when we demand a person to invite us as a -- to be a speaker, we actually respect our students and the professors by allowing them to make their own judgment, and we don't think it's necessary before the speech is even given to come in -- (applause) -- with a series of claims and to attempt in a so-called manner to provide vaccination of some sort to our students and our faculty.

The chills that went up my spine when that "applause" you see above echoed - I practically yelled at the radio. The audio gives it a different sensory experience I assure you.

At any rate, their were in fact tough questions, protesters were allowed to demonstrate outside and I acknowledge that the longer this whack job was allowed to talk, the more he looked like a whack job, so whether it was PR move or not, the university did in fact deliver on it's promise to give him tough questions. So while I disagree with allowing him this platform, the university officials and some students did conduct themselves in a commendable way. The American whom should be most ashamed in this whole ordeal is Mike Wallace. In comparison his "interview" with Ahmadenijad of some months ago looks like a make out session.

This does not however explain why the ROTC is still not allowed on campus. And if Mr. Bollinger wants to fully acquit himself of accusations of bias then he can add to today's performance a lift on the ROTC campus ban. Then and only then will the "elitist academia" on each of our coasts that conservatives rail against on radio and TV be taking their first steps back into the legitimate and mature debate they so claim to treasure.

One last thought. When the students apllauded at Ahmadenijad's comment about how in Iran they don't prejudge the speaker before he speaks - they were, via that applause, condemning their own Dean's opening remarks. And as I yelled at those students blaring through my radio I realized that for a brief moment, the president of Columbia University (an avowed left-winger) and F. Ryan were on the same side in condemning evil. If that is possible, even briefly, then perhaps the unity that America displayed in WWII when confronting evil is possible again should we find oursleves going to war with Iran. Like I said, just a thought, but a hopeful one.
FR