• 
• 
• 
• 
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, introduced at Columbia University as ''ridiculous,'' reported in Tehran as his chance to make his case. Photo by Stephen Chernin/AP
by Matthew Hay Brown
In the blistering, 15-minute indictment with which he introduced Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad this week, Columbia University President Lee Bollinger called Iran a state sponsor of terror that was executing children, rounding up human-rights advocates, and supplying arms to America’s enemies in Iraq.
He told Ahmadinejad that he exhibited "all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," and said his denial of the Holocaust made him "either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated."
He called the president of Iran "ridiculous."
Here’s how Bollinger’s comments were reported yesterday by Iran’s state-controlled Islamic Republic News Agency:
"Before President Ahamadinejad’s [sic] address, Colombia University Chancellor in a brief address told the audience that they would have the chance to hear Iran’s stands as the Iranian President would put them forth."
(Columbia President Lee Bolinger, above right, photo by Getty Images.)
Other stories on the IRNA’s English-language web site do allude, albeit obliquely, to the nature of Bollinger’s remarks. One says a member of the Majils, the Iranian parliament, found his actions insulting and offensive; another reports that Iranian academics have written a letter expressing "indignation" at his "aggressive tone and degrading behavior."
That second story refers to a "statement about Iran" that "was full of undocumented charges brought by the media," and concludes that "it is regretful that the media owners easily elicit what they want the president of a reputable university to say in his lecture."
But Iranians hoping to learn what it was that Bollinger actually said – and those outside of Iran hoping that his condemnations of Ahmadinejad would make it through to ordinary Iranians – will come away disappointed.
Comments
Ya gotta give it up to Lee Bollinger for laying it on the Iranian fascist.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 26, 2007 6:45 AM
Ahmadinejad is a loathesome little bug. "Ridiculous" is an apt description, however using that adjective risks underplaying his true nature. After all Hitler was certainly ridiculous.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 26, 2007 7:04 AM
The media gave the Iran guy what he wanted, a chance to show how stupid the US is by bashing an invited guest. This will play well in the ME for those that do not like our policy toward them.
Posted by: lylepink | September 26, 2007 8:12 AM
His interviews on TV and appearance at Colombia University exposed him as a man who cleverly dodges the issues.
His answers showed him for what he is, a propaganda tool. I'm glad he was given the opportunity to show how shallow his ideas are.
Iranians elected Ahmadinejad, with the clear mandate of improving their economic lives. His campaign slogan, "We can do it," implied fighting corruption, not building the Bomb.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | September 26, 2007 8:58 AM
I think that by and large Ahmadinejad came off well in his visit to NY. Why were some parties so adamant that we don't listen to him?
He made many good points, a few that I didn't agree with, but he was not the monster that I was led to believe he was supposed to be. It's more important than ever that we hear what people have to say at this time.
Posted by: Jeff | September 26, 2007 10:21 AM
People can not be this naive are they? As a former member of the military I find it very troubling that a very reputable US University, would allow a man who is directly responsible for the deaths of countless American soldiers, a platform to spout his nonsense. THis will play huge back in the middle East. They will edit out everything and just show this guy insulting the US in its own backyard. It will make him even more popular with his followers. THis is exactly why you do not let this guy have that platform. It almost seems like the Dean did it to get publicity for himself in his speech to introduce Irans dictator. Now factor in the fact that Columbia does not allow the US military to have recruiters on their premises. What is happening in these colleges? Who are these people in charge? It saddens me to this happen. It is one thing if it is some small school in podunkville, but Columbia is one of the best colleges in America.
Posted by: Vinny | September 26, 2007 11:11 AM
Jeff - would your last name be Chamberlain? As in Neville? As in ignorant moron?
Posted by: Bill | September 26, 2007 12:27 PM
And, I would find it very troubling that someone in the Middle East (or anywhere ales in the world) would allow a man who is "directly" responsible for the deaths of countless innocent Iraqis, or innocent Afghans (or even American soldiers) the opprotunity to speak much less in their country then their academic institution....
Concerning Iraqis or Afghan's it doesn't matter if they are bystanders bc they are the direct bystanders of the policies of our president. I would find it very troubling if any Middle Eastern country housing almost 2 million Iraqi refugees (incl. European ones with a much smaller number by comparison) as a direct result of the policies of our president (esp. while waiting on the world to fix the mess ;including the US who host refugees next to nil in comparison; who cares why) , and refuse to host our president; hear his side, his message. The fact that one may have more credibility to be in the "right" doesn't make a difference bc you wouldn't know if you don't give both sides a chance to speak. And the ability to speak is not the same thing as asking and answering your own questions when discourse takes two people ; it is beyond important that not only do those who have an opinion on a widely accepted opinion speak but that those who are the direct source of a wildly accepted opinion is exposed.
It does NOT matter how such a visit to an academic institution is received; it's not the White House receiving him; it's not the WTC cite receiving him. Any one person has no control over the perception of them or events. The only thing they are in control of is their own presentation. Why would we want it any other way in an academic institution.
Posted by: Not impressed. | September 26, 2007 12:30 PM
Other than university presidents or reporters, who should be surprised that Iran censored Bollinger's remarks?
Which makes a mockery of Bollinger's invitation to this tyrant. A "debate" or a true "dialogue" presupposes the free exchange of ideas and information that dictators take advantage of in countries like the U.S., but never allow in their own country.
Posted by: Bruce | September 26, 2007 1:19 PM