NewsQueryFU (NQFU)

Ahmadinejad didn’t say anything new as far as I could tell. University President Lee Bollinger’s remarks at Columbia were far more interesting.

Certainly, there was nothing wrong with Bollinger confronting Ahmadinejad to his face about his and Iran’s various reckless words and actions that have helped make the world a more dangerous place. Bollinger was on shakier ground in his black-and-white depiction of the struggles taking place in the Middle East. I was surprised, however, that Bollinger felt the need to insult Ahmadinejad so personally. That sounded a little more like a Friday sermon in Tehran than a discourse in the American academy.

Bollinger opened with the words: “Let’s then be clear at the beginning: Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator.”

He closed with the words: “Today, I feel all the weight of the modern civlized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for.”

Memo to Bollinger:

Ahmadinejad is an elected president; even if the balloting was cooked, as many Iranians feel, he had the genuine support of a huge number of Iranians. If there is a dictator in Iran, it is the un-elected heir to Khomeini who is far more powerful, Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei’s office derives legitimacy for many Iranians–including many of his sharpest critics– from the fact that the Islamic Republic he heads came into being through a genuine, popular revolution.

For a scholar, Bollinger acts simplistically in denouncing what Ahmadinejad stands for. He’s made reckless, perhaps ignorant statements about Israel and Jews. But to many Iranians, he stands for something else: national pride, empowering the poor and other things. Notwithstanding suspicions about Iran’s nuclear intentions, Ahmadinejad is on record strongly rejecting the development of nuclear weapons. Bollinger and many others may think that’s a lie. But it would be more useful to spar with Ahmadinejad on this and other issues than spew denunciations.

I might have been a tad less sanctimonious. Yes, Americans have alot of legitimate complaints about Iran’s crimes. Many of the points Bollinger raised were correct and put to Ahmadinejad eloquently. Yet, Bollinger speaks as if he is unaware that his own government overthrew an Iranian prime minister, installed and supported for three decades a brutally repressive shah and then backed the tyrant Saddam Hussein when Iraq was using WMD against Khomeini’s Iran.

Judging from Bollinger’s impulse to land a knock-out punch, perhaps he served to prove his critics right: he made a mistake to allow Ahmadinejad into the ring.

TEHARN, Sep. 25 (ISNA)-In response to the insulting remarks of the Columbia university president against Mahmoud Ahamadinejad, Iran’s university presidents raised their objection to Lee Bollinger.

Ahmadinejad was elected in a free two-level election and by the nation’s direct votes they announced in a letter to Lee Bollinger.

“Your insulting words to the president of 72 million people who have 7000 years of rich civilization and culture is embarrassing. Although apparently you have stated those hateful words under great pressure of the media it is disgraceful and surprising to see that the Media direct university president’s words.”

In this letter they have put 10 questions to Lee Bollinger with the purpose of clearing up the ambiguities between the two countries.

1-Why did American media put you under pressure to call off Ahmadinejad’s speech at Columbia University? Why do they broadcast hours of programs and news against him and do not allow him to answer the accusations? Isn’t it against freedom of speech?

2-Why did the U.S. government oust the nation-based government of Mosaddegh with the aid of Iran’s dictator, Shah in 1953?

3-Why did the U.S. support Saddam who used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and even his own nation during the imposed war?

4-Why doesn’t the U.S. recognize Palestine’s government which was elected with Palestinian’s vote? Why does it pressurize the Palestinian’s government? Why is the U.S. against Iran’s proposal on solving the 60-year old problems of Palestine through referendum?

5-Why couldn’t the U.S. army find Bin Laden despite all of its equipments? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bin Ladens and the Bushs and their cooperation on oil? How do you justify Bush’s spoiling the investigations over the 9/11?

6-Why does the U.S. government back the terrorist group of Mujahedine Khalq Organization (MKO) while it has claimed responsibility over many bloody bombings in public places of Iran and Iraq? Why doesn’t it allow the Iraqi government to evacuate the MKO base in Iraq?

7-Did the U.S. invade Iraq based on international vote and with the permission of international organizations? What was the real purpose of occupying Iraq which has left hundred thousands of its people dead? Where are the weapons of mass destruction which the U.S. claimed were stored in Iraq?

8-Why are the extremely undemocratic states with absolute monarchy regimes the U.S. best friends in the Middle East?

9-Why did the U.S. disagree with the “Middle East free of nuclear weapons project” issued in the board of governors while all countries agreed with it but Israel?

10-Why is the U.S. displeased with Iran and the IAEA agreement and why does it disagree with negotiations within the framework of international regulations for solving Iran’s nuclear issue?

At the end they have announced that they were ready to host Columbia University president and other faculties who were interested in seeking the truth to know about this nation without the filtering of the West media.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech at Columbia University created a furor in New York City. Victoria Cavaliere reports from VOA’s New York Bureau protests reverberated all the way to U.S. Congress in Washington.

Thousands of demonstrators, observers and activists lined the heavily-guarded streets around Columbia University where Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke Monday.

Columbia’s decision to host the Iranian leader at its World Leader’s Forum met with sharp criticism from U.S. politicians, New York City officials and Jewish groups.

In Washington, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky criticized Columbia for inviting Mr. Ahmadinejad.

“Think of the irony,” said Mitch McConnell. “Columbia University, home of the core curriculum that prizes an in-depth undestanding of Western civilization and the free exchange of ideas, is brining to its campus a state sponsor of terror.”

Last year, Columbia canceled an invitation for Mr. Ahmadinejad to speak after an outcry from Jewish groups. Mr. Ahmadinejad has said he supports the destruction of Israel and has described the Holocaust as a myth.

Columbia’s president Lee Bollinger defended the prestigious university’s decision to go forward with the speech this year, saying it was a testament to the freedom of speech guaranteed under the U.S. Constituion.

Outside the arena, flocks of protesters said the decision was an insult. Daniel Klein, one of the main organizers of the rally, said demonstrators opposed the platform Mr. Ahmadinejad was given at Columbia.

“The fact that he’s being brought here, to an Ivy League [one of the best in the country] institution no less,” he said, “is really a smack in the face to students on the campus, to the American students that are here that basically say, ‘we don’t want his despicable views on our campus.’”

Other protesters, like Russel Whitaker, said he thought Mr. Ahmadinejad’s hardline views were not in keeping with the theme of the World Leaders’ Forum, which examines global challenges and discourse.

“I think it was rather naïve, and I think that it was a mistake, a well intentioned mistake,” said Russel Whitaker. “There are people with whom you can have dialogue, but I don’t think he’s one of those.”

But the contentious public debate was two-sided. Many New Yorkers and students said they turned out because they were curious about what the controversial Iranian leader would say. Columbia students, including Mikhael Klassen, also said they support his right to speak.

“The fact that a venue like this exists, and that Columbia’s hosting an event like this, is significant because an event like this couldn’t exist in Iran,” he said. “In terms of the diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States, right now are not great, I think it’s good to have him here, to hear him speak, and our president can confront him on some of the controversial things he says.”

Another observer Margaret North, said she showed up out of curiosity.

“I think he should be given freedom of expression,” she said. “No one is going to agree on everything. We should hear his opinion.”

Protests were also held at the United Nations headquarters and more protests are expected Tuesday when Mr. Ahmadinejad is scheduled to address the General Assembly.