Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Rude behavior

September 27, 2007

Advertisement

To the editor:

I am embarrassed for Columbia University because of the rude behavior of its president concerning his remarks about Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, as quoted in Tuesday's Journal-World.

I agree with the quoted professor of Iranian studies that Bollinger's introduction was "very harsh" considering that Ahmadinejad occupies this position of authority in Iran and he was invited by the university to share his views and receive questions and comments from the audience.

How many of us would invite someone into our homes and then say derogatory remarks about them publicly? Bollinger's remarks about Iran's president being "brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated" are a reflection of his own arrogance and lack of hospitality.

On the other hand, I do not deny that Bollinger had the right to question a guest about their beliefs and apparent actions reflecting those beliefs since that was the stated purpose of the forum.

Carl Burkhead,

Lawrence

Comments

camper 6 years, 6 months ago

I can't figure out Ahmedinejad. I "slightly" respect his initiative to come here and speak and "reason" as he is often quoted, but I cannot reconcile his terrible misconceptions on the Holocaust, which is DOCUMENTED. His argument is pitiful. Almost like someone tryin to disprove that the sun came up at 7 because he knows you slept til noon. I respect the University for allowing him to speak. I also respect the tough dialouge displayed by the official. Anything less would be false encouragement.

0

DotsLines 6 years, 6 months ago

"The audit of the 2000 Florida votes showed Gore won by thousands of votes, meaning yes, he did win the electoral vote too, along with the popular vote."

Except according to both Florida and Federal law, we don't elect presidents based on the vote total counted by newspapers months after the inauguration.

Maybe you didn't read the papers. The votes were counted, according to Florida law, and the secretary of state in Florida certified George Bush the winner. Al Gore was the whiner, not winner, it's an easy mistake, I can see how you got mixed up. The losers decided to challenge that and essentially wanted to keep counting until they could find enough mysteriously appearing ballots to change the outcome. The Supreme Court essentially said you can't keep counting and keep counting and keep counting for months and months and months - for one reason because that's what Florida law says. You can't change the way the votes are counted (or how long you're going to keep counting them) after the fact. If you want to count them differently, change the law and do it differently next time. (Funny part about it is that Florida didn't do all that much to change their election laws.)

The Supreme Court did not appoint anybody. Read the ruling some time. As I said, the secretary of state of Florida, following the statutes written by the legislature of Florida, who were elected by the citizens of Florida, certified the winner. The Supreme Court said that the loser's challenge to that decision was insufficient to overrule that outcome.

Not that I expect you, or any of the other "Al Gore really won" cult to believe this any more than you have for the past seven years. As my grandmother used to say - "Get over it, you'll live longer."

0

Curtiss 6 years, 6 months ago

Geez, right_thinker, you keep going on like all the above, and you're going to have to drop the "thinker" part. Not only that, but your blissful ignorance of recent history disqualifies you from participation, I'm afraid. You comment on the news like you know what's going on, yet you still have the naivete to ask:

"Bush got less electoral votes than Gore and still was made president?"

Have you forgotten already? Yes! Where were you? The audit of the 2000 Florida votes showed Gore won by thousands of votes, meaning yes, he did win the electoral vote too, along with the popular vote. However, Bush was appointed by his dad's pals who really, really wanted to invade Iraq, and got the job anyway.

Man, it was in all the papers. Weren't you paying any attention?

Haven't we explained this to you before?

0

blingazzizi 6 years, 6 months ago

I find it interesting that the same kind of name calling that is being discussed by us is also being used by us. I read a column just the other day about this very same phenomenon in politics and I paraphrase, the problem with this is that one can now never express any understanding for the other side because one has now labelled it as ignorant and backwards.

I understand both points of view but I am of the belief that the only way I currently have any understanding of this man and his agenda is through the words of a third party. On any emotionally charged issue I have grown far too cynical through the recent years to trust the words of people I don't know and as such an open forum for the president of Iran to attempt to give credibility to his actions would have been interesting. Then all this discussion on whether or not he was treated fairly wouldn't be the story and I would be reading about what he said and what he has done instead.

Of course I don't know S&!t

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

"And, for the record, he lost the first vote, that is a fact."- americorpse

We elect our presidents based on the amount of electoral votes they get. Bush got less electoral votes than Gore and still was made president?

0

americorps 6 years, 6 months ago

RightThinker,

I realize our Constitution means nothing more than a God Damn Piece of paper to you as well, but I find comfort that most Americans agree Bush is a terrible president, including MOST republicans.

You remaining die-hards are so Quixotic that it is laughable...but you are all cotton candy, all puff and no substance.

It is also important to note that with the stricking down of of several provisions of the Patriot Act, Busshy has been found in violation of the US Constitution more times than ALL US presidents in history, COMBINED..

And, for the record, he lost the first vote, that is a fact.

As far as the second one, I am still concerned about Ohio, but we were also under the presumption at the time that the liar was telling the truth about Iraq, now we know the traitor lied.

0

Marion Lynn 6 years, 6 months ago

How's THIS for "rude"; Saudi women are prohibited from driving by Islamic decree?!:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/7001348.stm

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

Bollinger is a wimp. He staged that because of the heavy fire he was under by people that actually do have some common sense. Liberal 'scholarly' types, especially when deeply afflicted with BDS, probably have trouble tying their shoes in the morning. It's very sad.

0

75x55 6 years, 6 months ago

"So if our idiot deserves respect so does Iran's. After all he was an invited guest." - cynical

Lol! Earthy, but well put. Hospitality does somes take a bit of effort with some folk.

0

thebcman 6 years, 6 months ago

Yeah !! What Lynn said. and dude, i think you missed the fair.

0

L0j1k 6 years, 6 months ago

What happened to Set Em Up Jacks? Anybody wise on why they disappeared?

0

cynical 6 years, 6 months ago

The fact is, he is the president of a sovereign country, he was invited to speak, he accepted. Common courtesy demands he not be insulted in advance. He is a total idiot, but so is our president and all the conservative nutcases went ballistic when Chavez insulted him. So if our idiot deserves respect so does Iran's. After all he was an invited guest.

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

GWB a fascist? Wow! Twice elected too---I mean, twice stolen elections (gun-toting death squads).

Americans, why do you hate freedom so much?

0

americorps 6 years, 6 months ago

I was not offended that the truth was told to the Iranian President in blunt terms, nor would I be upset if Bush received a heaping dish of the truth if he were to speak in another country.

They both are morally bankrupt idiots who are turning their respective countries into fascist regimes.

0

Lynn731 6 years, 6 months ago

The guy supports terrorists, and is a terrorist himself. He lies through his teeth about everything. He should not have been invited in the first place, but he was. Given that he accepted the invitation, he should expect to be treated for what he is. A lying, dangerous terrorist who is supplying arms to the terrorists in Iraq who are using them to kill our soldiers. You are nutz, he should have been shot. Thank you, Lynn

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

DotsLines says: "You say you know the region and I have no reason to doubt you. So let me ask - I'm not saying a little diplomacy on their part wouldn't be a good thing, or that some of their problems aren't the result of their own intransigence, but do you think the state of Israel would even still exist if it had been left solely to diplomacy?"

No. Our military and IDF (of course) has been involved in many ways.

0

DotsLines 6 years, 6 months ago

"The LTE writer's dim view of the rude behavior. It serves no good purpose for us to invite him, then just give him more ammunition by saying the things they did before the speech."

I've said I believed the error was inviting him in the first place. This event had disaster written all over it from the beginning. There was no legitimate educational value to his appearance. There can hardly be an exchange of ideas from his visit without allowing a reciprocal visit from a US statesman to speak in Iran. Even if Bollinger hadn't made his comments, the derision from the audience would have served the same purpose in giving him "ammunition" regarding the rudeness of Americans.

"Remember, when you abandon diplomacy, bullets may come into play at any time."

I'm not saying this is a desirable outcome, but if you completely hobble a nation from using that option, diplomacy will fail.

You say you know the region and I have no reason to doubt you. So let me ask - I'm not saying a little diplomacy on their part wouldn't be a good thing, or that some of their problems aren't the result of their own intransigence, but do you think the state of Israel would even still exist if it had been left solely to diplomacy?

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

DotsLines says: "What on earth are you defending?"

The LTE writer's dim view of the rude behavior. It serves no good purpose for us to invite him, then just give him more ammunition by saying the things they did before the speech. Now, he gets to tell his own people, "See, I told you they were the Great Satan. Look at the way they treat people." This is despite the fact that he was sinking his own ship through the non-answers, etc. He does a pretty good job of making himself look ridiculous on his own and this was an opportunity for him to continue to do so while we take the high road. Instead, we just helped him make his case.

The way you have reduced the Iranian situation leaves out quite a bit that is important to the matter. To say that the "only reason..." doesn't account for a number of issues and the history behind the relationship. If only it were as easy as you describe. Remember, when you abandon diplomacy, bullets may come into play at any time. I feel it is safe to say that I have a better than average understanding of the region, not solely because I served our country there.

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

If you think I'm an idiot blabberboy, I can be sure that I speak words of great wisdom.

0

BABBOY 6 years, 6 months ago

Whoa, I forgot, right-thinker, you are still an idiot.

0

BABBOY 6 years, 6 months ago

So this little punk comes over and thinks he is going to be a big shot. Yeah he got a rude introduction. So what. How many great leaders have come into hostile environment and won them over. Bill Clinton was a master at this. So was Ronald Reagan. Good leaders can win over crowds.

This little punk was given his chance and failed badly. The University exposed him for the very poor excuse for leader that he is and the entire world got see him for the idiot that he really is. Good for them!

0

kneejerkreaction 6 years, 6 months ago

And what makes matters worse, there is a nudity ban on Mount Everest.

0

tolawdjk 6 years, 6 months ago

The swipes that were delivered should have no bearing on the advancement of dialog between the US and Iran. Columbia univeristy is a part of the US State Dept. The opinions expressed by its faculty and staff have no bearing on world politics. If a nation wants to start a war because some university president says that nation's president is a poopy pants, that nation was going to start a war anyway.

Seriously, Carl, you are placing too much perceived power into the hands of academia.

0

DotsLines 6 years, 6 months ago

"Soon, this guy will not be the person that we end up dealing with in Iran."

Yes, and we have so many reasons to think his successor will be more reasonable:

"Diplomacy on the world stage is vastly different (or should be) than just making demands of other countries."

Diplomacy has worked so well with Iran, after all. The reason you were "sitting offshore in that region of our world assigned to a US warship as a part of our tactical forces" is that the Iranians had invaded the sovereign territory of our diplomatic mission and were holding as hostages US citizens, representatives of our government and our country, for 444 days. And the only reason they were released is that the incoming president, unlike the very diplomatic Mr. Carter, would have had no qualms over using those cruise missiles you were sitting on.

What on earth are you defending? It's pretty much universally agreed that his appearance in the halls of academia was a complete sham, full of propagandizing and dodging questions. It wasn't an open and honest exchange of ideas or anything approaching something of value in an educational setting, except to make him look like a fool. He must be very satisfied with his appearance, since this discussion is ample evidence that it accomplished what must have been his primary goal to sow the seeds of divisiveness and discord among his enemies. There is absolutely nothing good that could have come from his appearance, and it should not have been allowed to happen.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

"That must have been frustrating."

It was an experience I will never forget, both good times and bad. I got to meet and work with some fantastic people, some of whom never made it home alive.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 6 months ago

I was sitting offshore in that region of our world assigned to a US warship as a part of our tactical forces.

That must have been frustrating.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

BTW, P A, while you were playing legos, I was sitting offshore in that region of our world assigned to a US warship as a part of our tactical forces.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

P A, you make my point(s) in so many ways. Thank you. I'll just sit back now and watch you set yourself ablaze.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 6 months ago

Your response indicates that you don't even realize that WE - the USA - supported the Shah.

No it doesn't, genius, anymore than it "indicates that I don't even realize that WE - the USA - supported" Stalin or Botha. Besides, when you say (regarding support for the Shah) "we" I assume you mean Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy and Ike, (I was playing legos in 1979) but especially Carter, who gave the guy a visa after the State department warned him that doing so might result in the seizure of the Embassy Personnel in Tehran.

Thank god that didn't happen! Oh wait, it did.

As for my outrage, I'm not outraged. The letter writer above is. I'm defending Bollinger, who called the dinnerjacket on his hideous human rights record and support for Hizb'Allah and support for Shiite insurgents in Ira.... wait a minute, now I see why you leftists are so outraged.

0

Dorothy Hoyt-Reed 6 years, 6 months ago

Assassinating people because they are gay or another religion is more rude. I know the conservatives don't believe in religous freedom and they all hate gays. Except the difference in religions, you would all be right at home in Iran. They even like nukes, and don't want to get rid of them.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

RT says: "Maybe Bollinger can get a spot on "The View" ::.maybe demonstrate how to use a gravity chair."

LOL. Or, if Stephen Colbert needs a vacation, maybe Bollinger could sit in.

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

Maybe Bollinger can get a spot on "The View" .......maybe demonstrate how to use a gravity chair.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

P A says: "I would support the same type of introduction for the Shah, P. W. Botha, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, etc. That you would not is sickening."

Your response indicates that you don't even realize that WE - the USA - supported the Shah. What's sickening is the fact that you can't even seem to envision the proper venue or the correct things to say. I would suggest that you get a better understanding of the situation before you voice your outrage (missplaced, I might add).

We should all be thankful that you are not a part of our diplomatic corps...or are you? Seems that we have been having some difficulty on that front for the past 7 years.

0

kneejerkreaction 6 years, 6 months ago

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says: In some countries, Bollinger might be buried up to his waist and then stoned to death.


Bollinger prudently turned down the Iranian Universities invitation to give a speech there. Two-way ticket not necessary.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 6 months ago

Anyone remember the shah of Iran?

I would support the same type of introduction for the Shah, P. W. Botha, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, etc. That you would not is sickening.

If KU can invite Ann Coulter to speak, and the world can tune into Rush Limbaugh and Pat Roberts, then why can't Columbia invite Ahmadinejad?

They can, as proven this week.

0

ontheotherhand 6 years, 6 months ago

If KU can invite Ann Coulter to speak, and the world can tune into Rush Limbaugh and Pat Roberts, then why can't Columbia invite Ahmadinejad? Listening to far-fetched ideas from crazy people keeps us updated on just how wacky the world is becoming.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

Regardless of how reprehensible his actions are, it pays us to put things into proper perspective. Anyone remember the shah of Iran? Who supported him? How did he treat his own people? How was he overthrown? Is it a surprise that those who overthrew him and his regime are just a little upset with a country that supported it? What have we done since then to make amends and try to improve the relationship? In their view, we have the blood of their citizens on our hands. How do we come off as lecturing them on human rights abuses when the abuses of the Shah are still in their recent memory?

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

pa writes: "As for this excrement:..."

Wow! You're way out there PA. No surprise YOU missed the point. Have you ever even been out of KS, much less the US? You attempted to put words in my mouth. That's not what I said. Since you bother to quote me, maybe you should re-read what I said and think for a second.

Diplomacy on the world stage is vastly different (or should be) than just making demands of other countries. Soon, this guy will not be the person that we end up dealing with in Iran. Yet, if we slap hard enough and long enough, the sentiment will remain. Way to poison the water for generations to come.

It sounds like you have no idea what "tact" is. When you are really good at it, you can step on someone's toes and make them think that they just got a shoeshine.

0

nettieb 6 years, 6 months ago

Let me preface what I'm about to say with a very firm "I think the man is evil and should probably die in a horrible, painful way".

To invite him to a debate is one thing. To invite him to participate in a lecture and a Q&A is another thing. But to invite him under those terms, with the sole purpose of turning it into a rant of personal opinion about his policies and practices as the president of his country takes a special kind of arrogance.

Whether any of us agree with Bollinger or not, he was set up to be chastized. It was wrong.

But again, I do agree with him and think someone should whack the guy.

0

DotsLines 6 years, 6 months ago

"That said, most intelligent people will realize that it is all fabrication and that he was dodging answers the whole time."

So what was the point in having him speak to an academic setting in the first place? Did they have any reason to expect anything different?

As I said, I thought Bollinger's comments were in questionable taste, not because of what was said, but because he said it to someone he invited. He shouldn't have been allowed to appear in the first place, and I somehow doubt the government of Iran would allow our president - even if it was someone other than our present one - to speak to their university students. This is the same guy who at first denied Oliver stone permission to make a movie about him; "Ahmadinejad's media adviser had said that while Stone may be a member of the "opposition" in the U.S., he's "still part of the Great Satan."" Now Ahmadinejad is reconsidering, saying "I have no objection, generally speaking, but they have to let me know what are the frameworks." (Read: If we can approve the contents.)

No one should have anticipated anything but the spewing of worthless propaganda from this man, and I find it hard to believe that Bollinger expected anything else, especially after introducing him as he did. If you're going to put the monkey on display, don't act shocked when people bait the monkey.

0

imastinker 6 years, 6 months ago

I'm not sure how many people actually watched the whole thing, but I did.

I thought the introduction was out of place and rude - for an academic setting. He should not have inserted his own questions and opinions before allowing him to speak. He should instead have focused on his terrible record and stuck to facts without going so long. Everything he said was correct, but it was out of place to do this.

Ahmadinejad just chilled me to the bone with the intelligence and cunning ability he showed that night. Allowing him to talk and spread misinformation to the American Public who may side with the likes of Nancy Pelosi was a big mistake. He should have been excluded and given a cold shoulder.

That said, most intelligent people will realize that it is all fabrication and that he was dodging answers the whole time.

0

posessionannex 6 years, 6 months ago

I think you guys oughta see that if our president got that reception abroad (and I'll bet he does get some chilly rooms in the mideast) we'd be parking carrier battlegroups off of the coast of (Insert Country Here)

What total B.S.

Name one country where this has been the case, in any form.

But if I had invited the guy to come speak at my university I'm certainly not going to start railing on him about his policies before the man has even spoken a word; that kind of behavior has no place in academics, or public relations.

seriously people, that kind of crap can start wars!

What unbelievable excrement. Bollinger preceded his remarks directed at the dinnerjacket with a discussion of what free-speech means, and how it can be uncomfortable. Essentially, you believe in free-speech for dictators, but not for Bollinger or any critic of those dictators, because: (it) can start wars."

The anti-war agenda trumps all else, even questioning someone's human rights agenda.

0

ImpactWinter 6 years, 6 months ago

I mean hell, I think our president is pretty much the worst thing to happen to American society...ever! but I'm still not going to be an @$$hat to him if I met him. The man leads a country and deserves a certain level of respect, even if you loathe everything he's done in office.

0

ImpactWinter 6 years, 6 months ago

I think you guys oughta see that if our president got that reception abroad (and I'll bet he does get some chilly rooms in the mideast) we'd be parking carrier battlegroups off of the coast of (Insert Country Here); I'm no fan of Iran, or Ahmedinejad; But if I had invited the guy to come speak at my university I'm certainly not going to start railing on him about his policies before the man has even spoken a word; that kind of behavior has no place in academics, or public relations.

seriously people, that kind of crap can start wars!

0

posessionannex 6 years, 6 months ago

Carl, did you not read what the president of Iran said? Here's his first statement:

"Oh, God, hasten the arrival of Imam al- Mahdi and grant him good health and victory, and make us his followers and those who attest to his (rightfulness ?)."

Have you yet been bothered to find out what he was talking about? Do you know what he was praying would happen to you? What acme-dinnerjacket said was pretty frickin' rude, in my opinion.

As for this excrement:

OK, since you guys missed the point, it is that the swipes that were delivered do not advance the dialogue between America and other countries. And, on the world strategic stage, when the verbal discourse becomes bitter and dysfunctional between adversaries, they often turn to displays of military might. I don't like what Ahmadinejad is saying or doing anymore than the next person, but I don't feel trading barbs or refusing to engage them appropriately and in a dignified manner reflect highly on America.

I guess what you are saying is this: No matter how reprehensible the views and actions of a world leader, he should never ever be confronted about them, because that would not encourage "dialogue." What the h**l is dialogue if it can't consist of a sentiment such as "you should stop executing people who don't agree with you."?

I don't feel trading barbs or refusing to engage them appropriately and in a dignified manner reflect highly on America.

What is "appropriate" for acme-dinnerjacket? Oh, maybe this:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1665579,00.htm

0

Flap Doodle 6 years, 6 months ago

In some countries, Bollinger might be buried up to his waist and then stoned to death.

0

Ceallach 6 years, 6 months ago

Oh, please. Idi Amin was also a head of state. Ahm. has not earned respect as a head of state or even as a human being. Get a grip, CB. The man is a waste of skin, and to defend him, or whine "I am embarrassed" about his treatment, is unacceptable.

0

kneejerkreaction 6 years, 6 months ago

OnlyTheOne (Anonymous) says: He is, after all, whether you like him or not the leader of Iran a Sovereign state and one of these days Americans may come to the realization that other peoples deserve to be treated as we wish to be!


Well, Carl, you did find one misguided person who agrees with your argument. Is this "turn the other cheek" or "treat others as you wish to be treated" malarky. Doesn't work like that OTO, not in reality. Scum floats to the top to be skimmed off. He is leading his country to doom. Anyone who feels sorry for the way littlebadsuitguy was treated needs to be reincarnated as a gay person in Iran. Iran, You'llrun, We'llallrun.

0

Nick Yoho 6 years, 6 months ago

Right_blinker you're priceless. Talk about out of touch with reality.I'm so far left,I go around the circle to stand on your right side,and those you listed mean NOTHING to me. George who?Daily Kos,founder is a CIA operative,move on is not really very left,just anti-war.Get a grip.The media MAY have leaned a bit left in 1970,but the right has built a huge echo chamber since then.Their is no left leaning media bias,all "news"stories are filtered through the corporate lap dog editors,and framed sideways.

0

kneejerkreaction 6 years, 6 months ago

I understand Carl's point. He is outraged about the treatment of Ahm. Are you joking, Carl? This guy deserves NO respect and does NOT deserve to be treated with common courtesy,. Had the students all reached into their shorts and thrown fcs at Ahm. like monkeys in the zoo will do to onlookers, that's ok too. Think about who you're defending or feeling sorry for, Carl. There's no advancing any dialogue with this guy. You think that just because he's head of a state that he deserves to be respected....wrong, wrong and wrong. He's scum. You're embarassed for Columbia...pulllleeeeaaaazzze. The treatment at Columbia was fair and justified and I found it quite amusing.

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

This is all very simple. The far-left has sold it's soul to the likes of George Soros, dailykos and moveon. The liberal Columbia university, like the unhinged liberal media and the Democratic Party are scared to death to p/o their sugar daddy and his stooges and are going to keep doing and saying extremely stupid things to answer to their Master. Howard Dean is the Chief Spiritual Advisor and Mentor for the far-left also and plays back-up to this dog and pony show. We've seen it time and time again over the past several years, especially the past months, weeks and days.

We know what the catalyst for all this is. Can I say it? OK. George W. Bush and an irrational, seething hatred for him. That's what's brought to this point of having to put up with the total stupidity of the far-left. We now will accept practically anything, except a defeat of our enemies....heck, we invite 'em to speak at American Universties.

If anyone thinks for a minute Ahmadinjerks not a total pathological liar, they are out of touch with reality.

0

Das_Ubermime 6 years, 6 months ago

I did not think that it was a good idea to invite Ahmadinejad in the first place. A person such as he will never enter into an open and honest dialogue with much of anyone (perhaps not even himself). Anyone wanting true dialogue should reach-out to Iranian moderates like the previous PM, rather than fundamentalist crazies.

That said, I can hardly see how anything Bollinger said was actually inaccurate. He was blunt and perhaps painfully honest, but he was honest. There is no way to honestly address Ahmadinejad's record without being harsh. Any mature adult should be able to handle honest criticism, even if it is harsh. It is something I deal with in my job all the time.

0

DotsLines 6 years, 6 months ago

"Americans complained to high heaven when Ahmadinejad and Chavez made derogatory comments about our President but it's okay for us to do the same to their leaders."

Well - yes. It's okay for us to say whatever we want about Ahmadinejad, and while it may have been in questionable taste (not because of what he said, but because he invited him there and then said it), Bollinger can say whatever he wants to, too. Unlike Ahmadinejad and Chavez, he's not a head of state speaking for his country about the head of state of another country and, by implication, about that country.

If a mother walking down the street with a bunch of kids passes another mom with her kids walking the other way, and her five year old says "Mommy, is that what you meant 'trash' looks like," it's rude and there are some red faces. If one of the mothers says "Kids, that's what 'trash' looks like," there's gonna' be a fight.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 6 months ago

shouldn't have invited this intensely evil man to speak.


the fair??????

0

benjaminlox 6 years, 6 months ago

Does anyone know when the Douglas County Fair is coming to town?

0

i_tching 6 years, 6 months ago

Ahmadinejad may say things that people do not like, but that's no excuse for childish and hypocritical behavior. I myself am very uncomfortable with his stated attitudes towards some other countries in that region of the world.

What, pray tell, could possibly be the connection between criticism of Ahmadinejad and criticism of Bush? Well, they have both said and done some crazy things. Both are religious nutjobs. Each has only the support of about 70% of their respective citizens. Both are cavalier about the lives of others, including their own people. Which one is worse? That's a crapshoot. Probably the one who is responsible for the deaths of the most people.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 6 months ago

OK, since you guys missed the point, it is that the swipes that were delivered do not advance the dialogue between America and other countries. And, on the world strategic stage, when the verbal discourse becomes bitter and dysfunctional between adversaries, they often turn to displays of military might. I don't like what Ahmadinejad is saying or doing anymore than the next person, but I don't feel trading barbs or refusing to engage them appropriately and in a dignified manner reflect highly on America.

0

The_Original_Bob 6 years, 6 months ago

Carl must have a bi-polar issue. I really have no idea what his point is.

0

OnlyTheOne 6 years, 6 months ago

Americans complained to high heaven when Ahmadinejad and Chavez made derogatory comments about our President but it's okay for us to do the same to their leaders. Sorry, but if you invite a man to speak to your organization you have the right to ask VERY strong questions but to insult him during the introduction is just plain rude. He is, after all, whether you like him or not the leader of Iran a Sovereign state and one of these days Americans may come to the realization that other peoples deserve to be treated as we wish to be!

0

Silence_Dogood 6 years, 6 months ago

right_loser: W. hates your children.

0

gl0ck0wnr 6 years, 6 months ago

It is amusing to watch one who has most likely spent his entire life in academic circles suddenly find out that not everything works like a graduate seminar. Columbia complicated the unfortunate choice of speakers by lending a completely unlikable man a tiny amount of sympathy, thus lessening the impact of his dreadful lecture. The university would have been far better to allow the students to discover his nightmarish logic through their own questions and his non-responses, but no doubt the professor felt he had to throw a bone to endowment after a week of painful press. I am, however, willing to believe him that there are no gay folks in Iran... I mean, seriously, did you see his suit?

0

PROAMERICA 6 years, 6 months ago

Carl Burkhead I'm embarrassed you were allowed to say anything.

"Liberals are proof that not everything in nature has a purpose"

0

Tom Shewmon 6 years, 6 months ago

Rudeness from the left these days is really not their fault . It stems from a very serious affliction called BDS. Someone should help the sufferers of this dreadful disorder. It's awful.

0

allateup 6 years, 6 months ago

yes, exactly what is Mr. Burkheads point?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.