Universities are for scholars, not dictators and thugs. So why is Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad being permitted to speak at Columbia University?
Columbia President Lee Bollinger says the purpose is to inspire debate among the
students. He adds "Such a debate could not take place on a university campus in
Iran." Maybe Iranian universities just have better sense and more patriotism
than that found on American campuses.
Columbia is one university that refuses to allow ROTC on campus
or any U.S. military representatives. They refused a platform to John McCain and
drove Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrist out of the building before he even had a
chance to deliver his message. Yet they are eager to hear the words of Mahmoud
Ahmadi-Nejad, the leader of a country that we will likely be at war with within
the next 12 months.
No doubt Columbia would have offered a platform to Adolph
Hitler in the early months of 1941 as well, by today's standards.
Columbia University defends their stand against the military
sighting the militaryís ďdonít ask, donít tellĒ policy on gays in the military.
Yet they invite the Iranian dictator who executes homosexuals for being gay in
his own country. The defense of their policy doesnít hold up when it comes to
The agenda of Columbia University has nothing to do with gays
or any other minority group. It has more to do with condemning and the tearing
down of America by representing it as an evil force in the world for the purpose
of encouraging the changes being promoted by communists for the past half
century. Columbia U. would refuse to allow a visit by the American commanding
general in Iraq, but welcomes a visit by the commander of the Republican Guard
Are not the young impressionable minds of our college students
subjected to enough anti-American propaganda already? Does anyone really think
that what they will hear from Ahmadi-Nejad will be anything but anti-American
propaganda and lies? If it was just for debate purposes it might not be such a
problem. But with the already anti-American atmosphere that exists on American
campuses today, there will be those in the audience whose anti-American views
will only be reinforced. This can only serve to lend more American support to
the enemy and we already have too much of that in Congress and the media.
In a time of war, and especially this war with all it's
propaganda and abuse of American rights to free speech, common sense dictates
that adding to the enemy propaganda being fed into the soft minds of America's
young is simply not in the best interests of America and should not be
encouraged on Campus. Do not American colleges have some responsibility to their
country? Shouldnít the government and the taxpayers who help to fund these
universities demand that they represent more patriotic American views? What are
we doing to our country, and what will result from it? One thing I do know is
that it wonít be the America that we knew or that the nationís founders intended
when these students are running the country.
Forget about all this "right to free speech." We don't have to
be constantly reminded that it is an important "right" in American society. The
world is already well aware of that. Just because we have the right to do
something doesn't mean that we should. Ahmadi-Nijad is not an American citizen
and does not have a right to appear at Columbia University to further spread his
propaganda. University presidents and staff have a responsibility to use good
judgment in what to allow on their campuses. On this, Columbia has failed
Why has Columbia University extended this invitation to
Ahmadi-Nejad? Is it to further the education of their students? Is it to poison
the minds of their students against America? Is it merely to present an opposing
view to inspire debate among the students? I don't believe it is for any of
these reasons. The only explanation that makes any sense is to make a name for
themselves and get into the headlines by hosting controversial "big name"
speakers. What else does this pitiful excuse for a college have going for it?
Nothing. It needs the publicity.
Itís a real shame that patriotic Americans are not
controversial enough for Columbia University and donít get the headlines that
hosting one of our worst enemies gets. No, it appears that Columbia University
is more interested in being the Brittany Spears and O.J. Simpson of higher
According to the game plan, half of Ahmadi-Nejadís time will be
spent speaking, and half will be spent answering student questions. It would be
interesting to see what questions are asked and how much his answers are
believed by the majority of students. Certainly there will be some students who
will see the dictator for who he is, and some who will agree with his
anti-American, anti-Semitic rhetoric. There may even be a few pro-American
patriots in the class who get a chance to ask questions. It might be interesting
to see the responses to them.
But if Ahmadi-Nejadís visit does as Bollinger says and promotes
debate, then that is cause for real concern as it would indicate that there are
some on the campus who agree with him, more than they agree with America.
But there is a larger reason why Ahmadi-Nejad should not be
speaking at Columbia or anywhere else in this country. He was granted passage
onto our shores for only one reason - to address the United Nations. His visit
should be limited to that. Were the U.N. building not in the United States, he
would not be coming here, not now or ever unless it was in handcuffs for his
involvement in the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis or aiding terrorists in Iraq in
the killing of American soldiers.
He was not granted permission to enter our country for a
speaking tour, nor was it for a sightseeing tour. Ahmadi-Nejad requested a visit
to ground zero at the World Trade Center under the guise of expressing his
remorse for the lives lost. Privately, I think we all know it was for the
purpose of his personal gloating and admiration of the devastation wrought by
his Islamic brothers as well as a photo op to be used in anti-American
propaganda once heís back on his own soil. Grieving for the lives of innocent
victims would somehow seem out of character for an Islamic terrorist.
His request was finally denied by the Port Authority of New
York and by the Secret Service for reasons of his own security. At least, that's
what they said. Ahmadi-Nejad will be escorted only to the tourist area near
ground zero by the Secret Service. He will not be allowed his photo op at the
grave of 3000 Americans killed by his Islamic brothers and supporters. It seems
someone in New York has some sense anyway.
Former New York Mayor, Ed Koch, stated in a television
interview last night that the Iranian presidentís Secret Service detail should
be made up of all Jewish volunteers to escort the Jew hating anti-Semite. I
couldnít agree more. But with the politically correct atmosphere that seems to
prevail in our government today, itís more likely that Ahmadi-Nejad will have an
Islamic escort with volunteers of CAIR members.
Ahmadi-Nejad should be restricted to the purpose of his visit
exclusively and not be allowed to tour anywhere on American soil. Not to the
grounds of the World Trade Center, not to Columbia University, not anywhere
outside the United Nations grounds. To do so will only serve to legitimize his
regime by treating him as a respected foreign dignitary.
In my view, he should not be allowed on American soil at all
including the U.N. grounds. Our government does reserve the right to refuse
anyone entry into our country, including for purposes of speaking at the U.N.
Itís already been done a couple of times before.
Why should we refuse his entry into our country? Because we
donít like him, we donít trust him, and because he is one of the top two supporters
of terrorism. He is an enemy of the United States, and his activities
in our country can serve no useful purpose for America. It can only serve his
own devious purposes and we are foolish to accommodate his abuse of our
hospitality. We are under no obligation to extend any courtesy to this man other
than allow him access to the United Nations under the U.N. treaty and that is
not really guaranteed.
Feeling obligated to extend this courtesy to our enemies is
just one more reason for getting the anti-American U.N. off of American soil. If
we wonít do that then perhaps we should use itís location in our country to
limit those who visit the institution. Just think - we could refuse visas to
foreign ambassadors who oppose us on the U.N. Security Council and finally get
U.N. support for pro-western resolutions. If Russia and China want to stand in
our way of stopping Iranís nuclear program, we just keep their U.N. Ambassadors
out of our country and out of the U.N. If they want to play hardball, so can we.