Iranian academics invite newest purveyor of America’s cowboy diplomacy to Tehran
posted at 3:18 pm on September 25, 2007 by Allahpundit
Oh, the irony of an Ivy League president being accused of cultural insensitivity. He should have shown more Middle Eastern style “hospitality” towards Ahmadinejad, it seems. The way Iran does towards, say, gays.
“The surprising point of the last night meeting is the behavior of the university president,” state-run radio reported, describing Bollinger’s introduction as “full of insult, which was mostly Zionists’ propaganda against Iran.”…
While Ahmadinejad likely expected at worst a hostile grilling by the audience, Bollinger’s sardonic comments reflected a blatant disregard for the tradition of hospitality revered in the Middle East. His comments may deflect some of the U.S. criticism he got for issuing the invitation to the Iranian president, but it could also backfire by drawing sympathy for Ahmadinejad, even in quarters where he would normally be sharply criticized.
“I don’t know why he (Ahmadinejad) stayed there and did not leave the meeting. Their attitude was an insult to the nature of the meeting. They should not treat him as a suspect,” said Mahmoud Rouhi, a nurse, in Tehran. Though state media did not broadcast Monday’s event live in Farsi, state-run TV showed a recorded version on Tuesday.
“The meeting and their approach showed that Americans, even in a cultural position, are cowboys and nothing more,” said Rasoul Qaresi, shopping at a grocery store in Tehran.
It’s hard to gauge how true that boldfaced part is but it’s a recurring problem in Middle Eastern democratization efforts. Iranians hate the regime, we’re told, but a bombing run or even draconian sanctions are apt to alienate the public and bolster regime support. The Shiites prayed for deliverance from Saddam, got it, and now Muqtada Sadr, one of the more virulently anti-American figures in Iraq, is the country’s most popular Shiite leader (with the possible exception of Sistani). If a few harsh words from a no-name like Bollinger is enough to antagonize people then they’re much less anti-mullah in Iran than we’d like to believe.
As for the Iranian academics, here’s their invite plus 10 questions for Bollinger to answer when he arrives. Sample: “Why does the US Administration always support the non-democratic and military governments?” Zzzzz.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Saddle up!
forest on September 25, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Seems fair, if Bollinger goes over and sticks it to them on their home soil, he’s got my write-in vote for President.
The only problem I have with Bollinger is that he didn’t do what Anne Applebaum suggested in her latest column – if we’re going to have Ahmadinejad at Columbia, they should have put him on stage with an Iranian dissident and forced him into an actual debate.
Enrique on September 25, 2007 at 3:27 PM
I’ve not said much about Imajutjob’s appearance at Columbia because I wasn’t feeling the outrage about it that others are- the overall impact of it is only slightly higher than zero. I don’t think too many minds got changed that day at home or abroad.
I was at least a bit impressed (but mostly surprised) with Bollinger’s introduction… but he’s about as much a “cowboy” as John Edwards, who’s closest encounter with a horse is probably the hoof-derived gelatin skin toner he uses.
Hollowpoint on September 25, 2007 at 3:32 PM
The Biggest Loser in this affair has to be the Columbia students applauding this midget douchebag in a dead tie with the Columbia students who saved any negative reaction for Ahmadinejad’s hilarious line about gays in Iran.
So, killing American soldiers, funding and training terrorists who kill civilians (of all sorts), attempting to develop a nuclear weapon, holocaust denial, stone adulterous women, hang homosexuals, enforce religious dress codes for women, general insanity — it’s all good.
But make silly statements about gays while at Columbia — Boo! Boooooo!!!!
There’s only so much a young leftist can take.
Jaibones on September 25, 2007 at 3:34 PM
Do the Iranians mean “Brokeback” cowboy? Because I doubt this professor knows what a horse or a cow look like.
Hmmm, judging by the pics of the treatment of gays in Iran, I’m thinking, no…
mjk on September 25, 2007 at 3:35 PM
They should have put him on stage with Holocaust survivors, real footage of the gulags/torture chambers, video of Ahmadinejad calling for the death of Israel and forced him into an actual debate.
Then this problem of an invite to debate, from Iran, would never have come up.
Mcguyver on September 25, 2007 at 3:35 PM
Hollowpoint on September 25, 2007 at 3:32 PM
I agree that he may not have changed too many minds with his speech, but I think Bollinger’s public condemnation of Ahmadinejad didn’t necessarily need to do so in order to have a positive effect. I’m not so concerned about the opinion abroad as I am with the beliefs and practices of those “liberals” here in the USA who have not effectively condemned the Iranian regime. I fear that too much Bush Derangement Syndrome on the Left and moderate Left has prevented them from seeing or speaking out about the danger posed by Iran to the rest of the world. I believe there are many liberals in the USA who are disgusted by Ahmadinejad, but do not condemn him strongly because it is seen as aligning themselves with Bush and the “neocons.” Having a big-time liberal academic like Bollinger bash Ahmadinejad like he did, with news organizations around the country covering it, may help to convince other liberals that doing so is “safe” and will not cause them to lose their anti-Bush credentials. Let’s hope more liberals have the guts to follow Bollinger’s lead.
Big S on September 25, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Bollinger specifically asked to lead a delegation to Iran in his opening remarks.
Big S on September 25, 2007 at 3:44 PM
Ten questions for Iran’s so-called “academics”:
1. Why do you continually have parades where your people chant the slogan and carry signs reading “Death to America” (we know why you hypocrites chant “Death to Israel”).
2. Why do you hang gay people?
3. Why do you bury and stone women to death?
4. Why are you the most UNGRATEFUL nation since our nation has overthrown a dictator who murdered and tortured your fellow shi’ites and you have never once said, “Thanks.”
5. Why are you providing weapons that not only kill our soldiers, but also kill innocent MUSLIM women and children (or do you not care because as the hypocrites you are, they are “Sunnis”)?
6. Why do you detain American academics under the pretense that they are “spying”?
7. Why is there no academic freedom in your universities and press? In fact, why are people not permitted to own satellites to pick up broadcasts from anywhere in the world and why do you restrict access to internet search engines?
8. Why are people in your nation forced to adhere to a “dress code” when so many do not wish to? This includes the forcing of certain hair and beard styles, as well as how much a woman is forced to cover her face or ankles for that matter.
9. Why have you never apologized for taking our diplomats hostage for 444 days and only released them because you feared our then-new president would not hesitate to bomb you?
10. Why is your president such an outrageous liar, or is it just part of his religious beliefs to do so?
And the BONUS question: why doesn’t your president take a bath more often?
simeon on September 25, 2007 at 3:46 PM
Yup, we’re cowboys.
Just keep it up buddy.
Soon we’ll be playing cowboys and Iranians.
natesnake on September 25, 2007 at 3:47 PM
____
Off-topic, but this hasn’t been getting any coverage. Large democracy protests in Burma, lead by thousands of Buddhist monks, are facing a showdown with the military goverment. I think it deserves a mentions somewhere.
____
Asher on September 25, 2007 at 3:54 PM
If he does go there, we’ll at least see what he looks like blindfolded.
JammieWearingFool on September 25, 2007 at 3:56 PM
What’s wrong with cowboys?
Mr. Bollinger should politely decline because it’s not safe to go. He should, however, respond point-by-point to their idiotic deca-list.
Entelechy on September 25, 2007 at 4:00 PM
I think you’re being a bit… optimistic. More often than not, liberals who deviate from the BDS party line are immediately branded as traitors and Bush-loving neocon sympathisers.
The same liberals who wail about Darfur, Tibet or anywhere else we don’t have a significant national insterest in will happily tell you how great things were under Saddam until the evil neocons imposed sanctions and invaded.
They may not like what Iran does to homosexuals and dissenters, but they wouldn’t think twice about throwing them under the bus if it meant opposing Bush’s policies.
Hollowpoint on September 25, 2007 at 4:02 PM
I think Bollinger made every misstep possible.
First, the invitation should never have been extended.
Given that he did invite Ahmadinejad, he should have played the role of host or moderator and he should not have been the one to attack Ahmadinejad. That seemed to be in poor taste in my opinion (not that Ahmadinejad deserves to be treated with respect, but if you’re going to invite him…). That just made Bollinger look worse than he already did.
A third party, or even the students of Columbia, should have been the one(s) to put the screws to Ahmadinejad.
taznar on September 25, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Considering he essentially begged for the invite, I don’t think he has a choice.
Editor on September 25, 2007 at 4:09 PM
Maybe so, but that just proves my point. There are many dailyKos nutcases who get all hot for A-jad, but there are also a great many liberals who are simply silent on the issue, for the kinds of reasons you state. There are responsible liberals in this country. Speeches like Bollinger’s can only help to embolden them. I’m not saying that it’s going to cause sweeping changes, but it draws attention to the liberal case for opposing the Iranian regime from someone not too invested in the partisan wars going on these days.
Big S on September 25, 2007 at 4:09 PM
simeon on September 25, 2007 at 3:46 PM
Great list. Three more:
11. Why are women in your country excluded from from presidential candidature?
12. Why are women’s rights activists attacked?
13. Why are children of American women retained with the sanctions of your goverment when visiting families in Iran?
Entelechy on September 25, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Understood. He made a great point with the invitation. I liked it. However, he should never go outside of the embassy/state protection, which I doubt he’ll have.
Besides, their invite is bogus, as he’d never be allowed to freely hold a live debate with anyone there. It’s just their way of playing baby. The region is famous for righteous indignation over little, and plagued by myths and ‘customs’.
Entelechy on September 25, 2007 at 4:15 PM
We do not have women in Iran. Who told you that? There is not the phenomenon in Iran like you have here.
Editor on September 25, 2007 at 4:16 PM
If’n ya wrestle with hawgs, ever’thang git covered in sh!t
Bollinger should state that “after consulting with the state department, it has been decided that a terrorist-sponsoring nation like Iran poses far too great a security risk”
Let the left eat their dead
Ochlan on September 25, 2007 at 4:19 PM
Heh, Editor, never mind – I was just daydreaming a little, sadly.
Entelechy on September 25, 2007 at 4:20 PM
That’s why you just slaughter them, instead.
Editor on September 25, 2007 at 4:20 PM
A nice hog roast, perhaps? Flash-broiled at 1/2 million degrees Fahrenheit…
Ochlan on September 25, 2007 at 4:37 PM
They are asking Bollinger to defend our Governments behavior. Fat chance, Bollinger is a liberal and would side with Iran on all of the questions. So now he is invited to go over and grovel at their feet, or go over and weakly defend what he does not believe in, or stay here and look like a goat.
Looks like the great acadamian painted himself into a corner. Better send Newt over, a real intellectual American to bail him out.
right2bright on September 25, 2007 at 5:27 PM
He will take every opportunity to play the victim card, right out of the liberal play book.
desertdweller on September 25, 2007 at 5:30 PM
A caller yesterday (Hewitt?) [Iranian American, loves America, hates the Iranian regime] was offended by Bollinger, saying that a hospitable welcome is an absolute necessity in Iranian culture, even if you don’t mean it.
eeyore on September 25, 2007 at 5:49 PM
nice.
Mephistefales on September 25, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Who is this Ben Laden guy the Iranians speak ok?
BadgerHawk on September 25, 2007 at 6:08 PM
This is true. My farsi teacher also spent a lot of time talking about customs in Iran. There are a lot of things spoken in Iran out of tradition (Shopkeepers offer to give things to customers over and over, even though it’s known by both parties that the customer will end up paying), but in the case of Ahmadinejad I don’t care.
BadgerHawk on September 25, 2007 at 6:12 PM
Oh they have a problem with Cowboys,well thats not
how the world works for me,John Wayne would of had
this mess cleaned up a loooog time ago.
canopfor on September 25, 2007 at 8:50 PM
Personally I thought Bollinger pulled MadJads sh!t streaked underwear down to his ankles and off then inside out and back over MadJads head.
BL@KBIRD on September 25, 2007 at 9:09 PM
Actually, if US and western academics were prone to challenging nutjobs like Dinnerjacket, instead of prone to treating them like rockstars, Bollinger would not have had to go as far as he did into the insults. Even though they were absolutely true, they are subject to being spun into boorishness and thus losing their power.
Why can’t we have a sane academia, that offers a firm and constant challenge to dictators? Then they wouldn’t have to be rude when they suddenly realize that they may have put their alumni funding in jeopardy!
drunyan8315 on September 25, 2007 at 9:56 PM
Those questions look like they were written be Jannine Garafalo.
He should go over there with ribs and hot links from one of the joints on 79th street
They’d kill him.
LtE126 on September 25, 2007 at 10:01 PM
Bollinger should say he’s gay, and since gays do not exist in Iran, be cannot accept the invite.
Just to swizzle their shi’ite.
profitsbeard on September 25, 2007 at 10:03 PM