September 23, 2007

Columbia U. Is Unmoved by Criticism of Iranian President's Visit

Despite scathing condemnation from national and city politicians, Columbia University has resisted pressure to cancel an appearance by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran on the New York City campus on Monday, ABC News reported. “Iran is an important country. And like it or not, we are going to have to deal with it,” John Coatsworth, dean of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs, said on the network program Good Morning America Weekend Edition. “We are not giving him a platform. He has plenty of platforms.”

Nevertheless, the Ivy League forum has drawn outrage from many people. Members of the New York State Assembly and the New York City Council were among elected officials who demonstrated outside Columbia’s campus on Sunday, the Associated Press reported.

The conservative author David Horowitz called the university’s move a “disgrace” in comments to The Washington Times. Mr. Horowitz, a Columbia alumnus who leads a national campaign against what he sees as leftist bias in academe, said Columbia’s invitation to Mr. Ahmadinejad was an example of the political climate at America’s universities today.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a contender for the Democratic presidential nod, took a less critical stance on CNN Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer. Asked if Columbia’s invitation was “a good idea,” she at first demurred, saying that it was a decision for the university to make. When pressed on the issue, Mrs. Clinton replied: “Well, if I were a president of a university, I would not have invited him. He’s a Holocaust denier. He’s a supporter of terrorism. But I also respect the right in our country to make different decisions.”

Lee C. Bollinger, who is president of Columbia, promised in a written statement last week to use the forum to challenge the Iranian president on a number of issues, including his denial of the Holocaust, his calls for the destruction of Israel, and his “reported support for international terrorism that targets innocent civilians and American troops.”

The American Association of University Professors has not taken a stance on the debate over Columbia’s invitation, but it has urged university presidents not to bow to public pressure to cancel invitations to controversial speakers. —Charles Huckabee

Comments

1. Columbia University decision is remarkable and should be encouraged.

   Clinton attack on the Iranian Presidents is political opportunism. The presidents never denied “the holocaust” and he is NOT “supporter of terrorism”.

   The ongoing attack on Iran is a Zionist propaganda serving the state of Israel not the US and the American people.

   Ghali Hassan

   — ghali hassan    Sep 24, 12:41 AM    #

2. please do not invite this mad dog of jihad to speak on the forum of columbia university.you are doing a great disservice to this planet earth, who is the most barbaric antisemite the one biggest satan who called upon the muslim world to obliterate israel.he is pysopath, one wonder those stupid guys appoint such a moron and barbaric to lead iran

   — henry ong    Sep 24, 01:22 AM    #

3. As Columbia welcomes Ahmadinejad to campus, Columbia students who want to serve their country cannot enroll in the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) at Columbia. Columbia students who want to enroll in ROTC must travel to other universities to fulfill their obligations. ROTC has been banned from the Columbia campus since 1969. In 2003, a majority of polled Columbia students supported reinstating ROTC on campus. But in 2005, when the Columbia faculty senate debated the issue, President Bollinger joined the opponents in defeating the effort to invite ROTC back on campus.

   A perfect synecdoche for too much of American higher education: they are friendlier to Ahmadinejad than to the U.S. military.

   — Ziggy    Sep 24, 07:49 AM    #

4. Let’s see if I’ve got this straight…Ahmadinejad is OK to speak at Columbia, but Lawrence Summers is anathema at UCal-Davis? Isn’t something weird here?

   — Ernest DuBrul    Sep 24, 08:42 AM    #

5. Columbia and its president, Mr. Bollinger, would garner more respect for their decision to invite Ahmadinejad if it were not for their hypocricy. While inviting a man responsible for the deaths of thousands of his own citizens, not to mention American troops in Iraq, Columbia refuses to allow the founder of the Minutemen to speak and refuses its own students the choice of ROTC.

   Mr. Bollinger would do well to invite Mr. Gilchrist of the Minutemen and reinstate ROTC as a first step toward regaining his own credibility.

   — Bob Sarbane    Sep 24, 08:51 AM    #

6. Typical. Invite the Jew hater Achstain… right along with Hitler if he were alive… but you can’t invite the Minuteman guy. That’s freedom of thought and expression, liberal style. Yup, makes perfect sense in bizarro world.

   — Jim Patterson    Sep 24, 09:13 AM    #

7. Let’s wait and how the event goes before making judgements.

   — dave    Sep 24, 09:19 AM    #

8. It is a disgrace what is done in this country under the veil of “free speech”. People everywhere use this excuse to justify behavior that is immoral, hurtful, and socially unacceptable. “Freedom of Speech” has become a weapon used by individuals (and apparently now by Columbia University) to do whatever they choose to do without fear of repercussion. It is totally appalling to know that this known supporter of terrorism has been invited to speak at an institute of “higher education” here in the United States when our troops are putting their lives on the line everyday. Just exactly what kind of education are we really providing?

   — M. Carpenter    Sep 24, 09:31 AM    #

9. Perhaps the question Columbia University should address is does it have any core values beside its desire to do whatever it wants under the guise of “academic freedom” (Not to be confused with the ideal of free exchange of ideas)?

   — John    Sep 24, 09:39 AM    #

10. Childish behavior abounds in higher education. The Iranian president openly laughs, lies and smirks when asked direct questions. This is no international forum. It’s a misguided childish venture led by persons not well grounded or educated.

    — Otto T.    Sep 24, 09:48 AM    #

11. Again, I must ask: does anyone here actually think he’ll be allowed to speak? Let’s start a betting pool on just how many complete sentences he will actually get to utter before being shouted down by the hostile crowd (with full University support for their heckling). One sentence? Three? One thing is sure: no “disruptive student” will get tased at this one.

    — C.S.Nunis    Sep 24, 10:00 AM    #

12. “Laughs, lies and smirks when asked direct questions.” I know a president of another country that exhibits the same behavior.

    — SW    Sep 24, 10:01 AM    #

13. Accademic support for spirit of the first amendment would gain credibility if accademia were willing to listen to those it disagrees with along with those it agrees with, or in the case of Ahmadinejad, those that stir up controversy. Columbia is right to host Ahmadinejad, for what he says is important. It should apply the same criteria to individuals it denies a forum because of political or social opinions it finds distasteful.

    — jcj    Sep 24, 11:57 AM    #

14. The U. S. Government should immidiately ban all Federal funds of any kind to Columbia University including student loans, tax deductions, and grants.
    They want to invite Hitler and not ROTC, let them see how long they last without the American taxpayers underwriting them.

    — Marice M. Eisenstein    Sep 24, 11:57 AM    #

15. It is Columbia University’s right to invite thugs and psychopaths to its campus. Students need to examine terrorists up front and understand why we are in a fight for survival.

    — Martin Slann    Sep 24, 12:36 PM    #

16. This is not about free speech; it’s about choice. And Columbia made a dumb one that not only hurts its own credibility, but that of all academe. Along wiith the hatemonger, terrorist Ahmadinejad, would Columbia welcome David Duke? The funny thing not many in academe seem to get when they hide behind academic freedom or freedom of speech is that no freedom, no right, is absolute. Academic freedom doesn’t mean it’s okay to promote a propagandist hatemonger with the justification that it’s the exchange of different “ideas.” Everyone knows he’s claimed the holocaust to be a myth; everyone knows he’s advocated the destruction of a democratic nation; everyone knows he’s defied the U.N.; everyone knows he supports Iranians smuggling weapons to Iraq to be used against U.S. troops, and providing “reward” money to the families of Syrian “martyrs” who bomb school buses in Israel. This is something for higher education to be proud of? Gimme a break. No wonder the great unwashed question our ability to educate its kids.

    — Jeff P.    Sep 24, 01:11 PM    #

17. It is incredible that so many in this country say they believe in free speech and yet when an individual who is the freely elected president of a sovereign state wants to speak the fascism of the zionist and neo-conservative movement in Amerika get in an uproar. Let freedom ring even if it does offend the Isreali lobby and the fellow travelers.
    ON COLUMBIA....

    — Jerry    Sep 24, 02:33 PM    #

18. Marice M. Eisenstein has a great point!

    — Ban    Sep 25, 11:00 AM    #

19. I agree with Bollenger that the Iranian president is a tyrant, bully, and exhibits values that I abhor. Yet I fully respect Columbia’s right to entertain this guest in the spirit of free speech and academic freedom. A positive outcome of this whole event is that Bollenger took a public stand in denouncing what this man stands for – - a sentiment not often heard in academe where anything goes and, the views of many (read conservatives) in the academic community are surreptitiously stifled and silenced both in and outside the classroom.

    — md    Sep 25, 04:03 PM    #

Previous: Iowa Universities Help Banks Market Credit Cards to Students, Newspaper Says
Next: Delaware State U. Reopens After Friday's Campus Shooting