Mahmoud Ahmedinejad at Columbia University

[Electrequiem]

I just want to express my disbelief at how discourteous the President of Columbia University had been to a foreign leader.

From the very getgo, the allegedly liberal University's president doused Ahmedinejad in a negative limelight (once even analogizing him with Hitler), thus generously coating the student body in a thick layer of subjectivity. He called Ahmedinejad a "petty and cruel dictator" and his comments about the holocaust rendered him the label of "brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated." He then proceeded to herald some of the worst misquotes in the history of our time and accused Ahmedinejad of seeking to destroy Israel (that whole "wipe israel off the map" thing is not true ... http://youtube.com/watch?v=4mScWWtRfGQ)...

I probably can go and on and on about how much I am frustrated with such hypocritical and ignorant attitude (especially this one coming from an Ivy League)...but I am sleepy. Let me know how you guys feel about this.

Cheers.

[ammark]

I was sleepy too when they aired it live. I fell asleep since ahmedinajad was beating about the bush initially about knowledge science and enlightenment. Oh, and I'm in BD now... so no youtube either. Gonna read up on this instead.

[chinaman]

If I'm not mistaken, Lee C. Bollinger, president of the Columbia University, teaches free speech. Perhaps, he took the liberty and spirit of free speech to say whatever he said and how he said it.

I find his comments exceedingly distasteful and repugnant. An accomplished teacher should be articulate enough to pass on even the harshest of messages like a gentleman. If the Iranian leader is brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated, as he put it, he himself proved to be no better either.

[Alien]

Columbia President Bollinger Introduces Ahmadinejad

[Alien]

I wonder why on earth does he come to NY. UN head quarters should be located in a neutral country like Switzerland or country that are rather shunned from world politics. This is totally rubbish.

I am no fan of this Ahmadinejad, but I don't understand why he goes there for the sake of being humiliated like a dog.

As for Bollinger, he is a prime example of ignorant fools who, amongst his million mind boggling question couldn't ask the very question: why his Columbia students go to Iraq in first place, why his country support Israel 24/7 and why they run torture cells in Guantanamo and have audacity to question other nation's human rights.

[cricman]

Q & A

[cricman]

Ahmadinejad was great, Murdoch(Owns Fox, Sky and NYpost) and Post can say he's a mad man, but just by listening to his speech, he is a very smart man and the Students in Columbia now know that too

Originally Posted by ammark
I was sleepy too when they aired it live. I fell asleep since ahmedinajad was beating about the bush initially about knowledge science and enlightenment. Oh, and I'm in BD now... so no youtube either. Gonna read up on this instead.

I read some BS that he was booed out of the Stage, when in reality he got a standing ovation. The media in this country really got me thinking now.

[Rubu]

Looks like, an effort to make a fool out of Iranian president did not go too well.

Good or bad, he is a smart man.

[Alien]

This whole episode shows how strong influence the Jewish groups/lobbyist have in US and no wonder this whole world is such a screwed up place.

[PoorFan]

For last few years, I got the feeling that highly reputed US university intellectuals becoming more and more 'untagged' diplomat, politicians! seems more naked and aggressive than so called BD university intellectuals every now and then. Couple of days ago Mrs. Rice reacted furious over IAEA president Elbaradai, saying 'leave the job diplomacy to diplomat', now I wonder how will she define the job of Columbia university professor come president.

Top to bottom of his ( CU professor ) speech was more like 'whoever says first is the winner' type of attitude, a performance targeted media, perhaps no matter what Iranian president says in return.

[Moshin]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the 5th President of Iran. He is considered as the most highly directed official of Iran, many think of him as being biased, and does not allow many rights to the people of Iran, for example the hijab debate and the nuclear weapons that are created that are causing tensions between the United States, and he only focuses on the United States' position in the World, and not focusing in the economy of Iran. He has agreed to continue making Nuclear Weapons, but many nations espicially the States, critisise him as making them for unjust reasons.

He is particually in the debate of the Hollocaust disaster, he thinks all of the story that took place in Europe, the killings of 6 million people was just a myth, and says he needs more evidence to prove the massacare, and tells people to think of it as just a theory, and he is not convinced of it, what do you think of this, is he talking nonsense, is he trying discriminate the Jews or what?

He has agreed with Iran's Nuclear Program, and said is was just for peaceful reasons and that policy is allegal in Islam, and has specifically has said that is just for peaceful matters, so why is the United States being very angry over the program, I mean they have over 10,000 of them, so why can't we Muslims have these kind of stuff, this is just wrong, and they do deserve the same rights, or maybe because what he said about Israel, that they should be demolished completely, what do you think? Should Israel be destroyed and off the map? Should Iran continue the nuclear weapons program? Is the Hollocaust real and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is just being stupid? and should we Muslims step up for our rights? Discuss the matter of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his policies, make your view be heard.

[Moshin]

I am not happy about this, he did not deserve that kind of treatment and comments by him, he is the president of Iran, and should be respected, especially his point of views about the Hollocaust!

[Hatebreed]

I think Ahmedinejad spoke very sincerely and intelligibly, despite such a rude introduction by Lee Bollinger. It was very disrespectful of a university president to verbally assault a person like this who you have invited to speak there. He didn't go there to be insulted or intimidated. People may have their own views about him, but it appears the students have responded rather positively to his answers. Just watch as they get labelled pseudo-intelligent liberal scums.

[Arnab]

It's a show for public consumption. CU prez had to say what he said in order to make it more saucy.

[chinaman]

Originally Posted by Arnab
It's a show for public consumption. CU prez had to say what he said in order to make it more saucy.

MSG or Radio City Music Hall or even the Lincoln Center would have been better for such 'saucy' adventure. Better yet, Leno or Letterman show ..

[Farhad]

I for one do not sympathize with Ahmedinejad. He might seem like a little man being bullied by the US media, but hes no angel. Not by a long shot. I urge you guys to read up on some of his policies if you have some extra time. That being said, I didnt find Bollingers comments to be particularly tasteful either...

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by chinaman
MSG or Radio City Music Hall or even the Lincoln Center would have been better for such 'saucy' adventure. Better yet, Leno or Letterman show ..

I think the CU Prez made use of a very "academic" vocabulary in his speech, which was consistent with the setting.

[chinaman]

Not an inept extenuation

[Miraz]

Ahmedinejad is really a smart man.

With one sentence he nullified the speech of the CU President Bollinger

Originally Posted by Ahmadinejad
I think the text read by the gentlemen here more than addressing me was an insult to information and knowledge of audience here.

Really surprised by the cheap shot from the University President. He should learn the basic etiquette before addressing any audience again. IMO, he helped Ahmedinejad to overcome the negative mindset of the audience.

[Puck]

the statements above, apart from a single exception, is rendering this public drama as an east-west duel. while it hasn't been uttered explicitly, there is a latent notion that the duel is also fought between a judeochristian western philosophy and a islamic ideologue. as it can be expected from this forum, the general consensus of opinion seems to be that ahmadinejad was insulted by the west, and that he gave back as good as he got.

i think we need to separate the country of usa and its politics from the university of columbia. opinions expressed by the university figurehead is in no way representative of public consensus within usa. it can also be argued that holocaust denial and anti-Israeli sentiment expressed by the iranian president is in no way representative of the entire public consensus of the democratic islamic republic of iran. the country might be run under shariya law or its shi'i interpretation, however, at its root iran has a democratically elected parliament and political machinery, very similar to any western, developed country. the right to express ones opinion is perhaps where the two countries differ in.

ahmadinejad is no angel. he is a master manipulator of public opinion and has a machiavellian tendency in expertly using the political machinery to stay in power. he is a masterful politician and there are few in the west or the east who can rival his cunning. a detailed reading of his policies as well as opinion in iran would give a rather more accurate picture of the man. i know a little more about the background of this man than perhaps most contributors to this thread. my personal source of information is a british-iranian comic who recently pulled off a hit show at the edinburgh fringe festival. his family is of iranian aristocratic stock and also related to the esteemed president. iranians themselves are split in their loyalty towards their president.

in britain, the mainstream and left wing politicians abhor discussing the issue of immigration control as they fear it would collude with racism. immigration and racism are somehow seen to belong in one basket and better not be discussed. when the political right raise debates on immigration, they are tainted with notions of xenophobia. how is this relevant to ahmadinejad? well, the issue of anti-semitism and Israeli politics also seem to get wrangled up like immigration and racism in the western european countries.

let it be said that the Israeli politicians have used the holocaust as something of holy grail to garner public sympathy all through the western world. jewish intellectuals have also been somewhat guilty of this. however, to put this into context one has to take into account what a horrible feat the gas-chambers represented and still holds for the jewish soul. it was a horrific episode of history that was the culmination of almost two hundred years of anti-jewish sentiment expressed all through europe in the 18th and 19th centuries. a reading of feuerbach and marx's' 'jewish question' essays would present a detailed examination of historical arguments. shlomo aniveri had also written an excellent analysis of the jewish caricature on pre-war europe. suffice to say, the holocaust represents to the jewish man and woman what the 1971 war of sacrifice represents to the bangladeshi. one is of course a more recent event and had little coverage in the western media at the time or even now. the other had been milked to an extent over the last 60 years. both represent major human tragedies. how the bangladeshi's feel about their country, their existence, their independence can be held up as expressing the very same passion that the jews all over the world feel about the religious homeland. to them, it represents thousands of years of struggle for independence. the sensible amongst you and the genuine 'deshpremi' who are not so clouded over the idea of religious supremacy arguement should see the analogy.

it would be fair to say that most traditional muslims are generally anti-jewish. the modern muslim, certainly the muslim who had been born after 1947 tends to be a little more antijewish that their forefathers. much of this is a reaction against the palestinian struggle for an independent homeland. the jewish state of israel that is definitely responsible for the problem in the modern context, is seen as a wider judaic movement with its influencial backers in the united states and here in britain. however, the boudaries between the fact of nazi attrocities and the present state of israel is somewhat blurred in the muslim mind. so the gas chambers are either denied, the numbers argued and in some cases, jews are seen as historic enemies of islam.

this is a major problem. those born in muslim countries and raised within a religious upbringing where traditional islamic views foster, grow up knowing little about the holocaust, encounter little traces of jewish culture or for that matter jews.

i was born in bangladesh and spent the first 12 years of my life there. i went to a reputable catholic school in dhaka, was taught to read the quran (transliteration rather than the meaning of the words) by my mother and grandfather over school holidays since the age of 7, and largely spent my early years in a very secular, yet spiritual household. part of my ancestory is related to well known sufi saints and my grandfather used to tell the tale of how old people used to touch his feet, when he had visited the ancestoral village as a youngster. even within a very secular middle class and highly educated upbringing where a great grandfather had a degree from oxford in the 1930's, served as president of the oxford union, as well as various family members being graduates from the early batches of calcutta and aligarh university alumni, i learnt little about judaism or israel. talking to my cousins and peers who had been raised in bangladesh showed me that there is little knowledge of the religion or its people in south east asia. what knowledge is there is sourced from the anti-israel and anti-holocaust pedagogy.

i spent the next 20 years of my life in 'bilait'. i encountered my first jew at the age of 13. he was at my school. the school was one of the most prestigious in the world where many luminaries had attended from all over the world, including a couple of ex-indian and pakistani prime ministers. ariel lansberg was a doctor's son. his parents were both at the queen elizabeth hospital in some exchange scheme and ariel gained attendance as his grandfather had been a former pupil at the school. over the next two years we became best friends playing and representing our school in table tennis and badminton championships. since the early teens i have known many jewish men and women and even dated a few of the latter. it is through this exposure that i have found my views on anti-semitism to grow as strong as it is on racism, to the extent that i abhor all discrimination based on the grounds of race, gender, sexuality or disability. this is why i find blanket muslim hatred towards all jews to be dispicable.

ahmedinejad exploits this bias expertly to conserve his powerbase. america might keep state and religion seperate through its constitution, but over the years, religion had played as much havoc in the very lives of the american as arthur miller plays like the crucible spelt out. the recent dipping into conservatism had further alienated the major superpower in the eyes of the world populace. however, despite the intellectually challenged president and his oil loving cronies, america remains constitutionally secular. its culture allows for one of the esteemed universities to invite an abhorrent neo-con politician of a rival nation to speak openly and freely. the university figurehead might seem 'stupid' to you, however, just by inviting the iranian premier it pulled off a major coup against the iranian president's idea of freedom of expression. so yes, there are torture chambers operated by the american military in cuba, there were maltreatments of prisoners in iraqi prison cells, there had been an illegal occupation of another land by the neo-con american presidency, however, the laws of the land still allows for free exchange of ideas.

the best comment about this whole episode came from an iranian student of columbia university. she retorted that such invitations and platforms for the iranian president in america raises hope for future dialogue in whatever shape or form. 'we might be enemies at present but cultural exchange and simple 'chatting' is more likely to eliminate the misunderstandings on both sides.' i for one totally agree with her.

[al Furqaan]

this is why i find blanket muslim hatred towards all jews to be dispicable.

blanket hatred of anyone by anyone else is indeed dispicable...however often times there are many things underneath the blanket which would explain (not necessarily justify) why the blanket exists or appears as it does.

[shaoun]

i saw the video in youtube. it was a disgrace how he was introduced to the audience. but iranian president did an excellent job reply to all of those questions considering the situation. bush in that situation would probably run.

[BanCricFan]

Puck- dear fellow,

It seems like you have failed to grasp the spirit of this thread. Its not a discussion about Iranian presidents personality, credibility or even his legitemacy as a political figure head. If I'm not mistaken, Its about how a foreign President was treated by his "host" who is the president of a prestigious university too.

Its a shame that you had to drag in "holocaust" and muslim "hatred" towards Jews etc, to this! I think that debate is quite a different one all together and could have been voiced somewhere else.

BTW, you're making too many sweeping assumptions here, especially, at the outset of your post.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by BanCricFan
Puck- dear fellow,

It seems like you have failed to grasp the spirit of this thread. Its not a discussion about Iranian presidents personality, credibility or even his legitemacy as a political figure head. If I'm not mistaken, Its about how a foreign President was treated by his "host" who is the president of a prestigious university too.

Its a shame that you had to drag in "holocaust" and muslim "hatred" towards Jews etc, to this! I think that debate is quite a different one all together and could have been voiced somewhere else.

BTW, you're making too many sweeping assumptions here, especially, at the outset of your post.

hello bancricfan,

the thread title was used as a blanket term to express a multitude of views, some particularly disgusting. the comments of mohsin 31 are particularly distasteful and those of alien also carry a veiled sense of scorn.

references to anti-semitism had been made. the general tone of what had been expressed by many contributors carry an anti-semitic bias and reveal narrowmindedness.

this is not expected from muslims since the spirit of the faith is peace towards oneself and all others. muslims should not take the spirit of the salam lightly because that is the essence of islam. hatred breeds hatred. your own post tries to sweep the underlying issues under the carpet.

go in peace.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
blanket hatred of anyone by anyone else is indeed dispicable...however often times there are many things underneath the blanket which would explain (not necessarily justify) why the blanket exists or appears as it does.

there are always issues, however, it does not make the initial hatred any fairer. the tendency is to group human beings into religious, social or nationalistic boundaries, and it is expected that they all behave exactly the same way. this is just so unfair.

the world is much smaller now than it was in the past. the information age has revealed much about our inner beliefs. however, it seems that age old hatred remains dormant like a festering mould. the only way to alleviate this sense of the past is through dialogue and understanding. there is room for peaceful co-existence for each and every one of us. the nullyfying of the ira came through dialogue. the age between the intefada saw the plo leader greeted at white house lawn. talking achieves much in the long run. hatered does little to improve the human condition.