Editorials are posted and archived on JNonline.us . Editorial Free Speech Run Amok T here are many people who would have enjoyed seeing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad thrown in the slammer when he arrived in New York City because of his alleged role in the taking of American diplomatic hostages in 1979. Instead, the Iranian president was invit- ed to speak at one of the country's finest universities. Having denied that the Holocaust ever happened (or, as he recently indicated, it may have happened but was no big deal) and having threatened to destroy Israel, he is treated as a serious person with some- thing of importance to say to the students and faculty of Columbia University. The usual platitudes about the impor- tance of free speech in an educational setting were trotted out. But the invita- tion was an incredible lapse of judgment on the part of Columbia's president, Lee Bollinger. There is certainly a vast difference between promoting an open exchange on campus for competing ideas and issuing an invitation to a man that has openly promoted anti-Semitism and advocated crushing another nation. What intellectual value did Bollinger believe Ahmadinejad would bring to this affair? It was certainly an opportunity for Bollinger to upbraid his guest for his dis- gusting remarks, which surely must have had Ahmadinejad shaking in his shoes. But here was a man whose visit to New York began with a deliberate provocation; a request to visit Ground Zero of 9-11. This from the head of a nation that funds the sort of thugs who killed thousands at the World Trade Center. To his credit, Bollinger, a former presi- dent of the University of Michigan, stood up to British academics for their decision to boycott Israeli scholars. He told them they might as well add Americans to that list, too. And to their credit, Columbia students greeted Ahmadinejad with the proper response, jeering and laughter at his crackpot assertions. Still, it was hardly enough. Would Bollinger have opened his doors to the rul- ers of Sudan, currently engaged in spon- soring genocide in Darfur? It hardly seems likely. Besides being odious they are pretty much anonymous, while Ahmadinejad is a celebrity, a player. But their goals are pretty much the same, and Iran may soon have nuclear weapons with which to advance them. Arguments about the importance of open ideas would also be more compelling if they were not put forth on such a selec- tive basis at Columbia. Students who wish to enroll in ROTC, for example, must do it at another campus because the training corps for Army reserve officers has been barred from Columbia since 1969. A majority of students in a 2003 poll indicated they wanted it back, but the fac- ulty senate defeated such a measure two years later. Among the opponents was Lee Bollinger, defender of diverse opinions. Dr. David G. Marwell, director of the Museum of Jewish Heritage in New York City, said he did not extend an invitation for Ahmadinejad. "Were [he] to visit the museum," Marwell said, "like all our visi- tors he would be confronted by the unde- niable fact of the Holocaust — a powerful antidote to the poisonous distortions of history" Bollinger should have taken note. Li Forever Cheim by Michael Gilbert PEOPLE OF CHELMI THERE IS A CRISIS AMONG THE MIDDLE-CLASS SAWS OF AMERICA THEM CANNOT AFFORD TEMPLE DUES! THE CANNOT AFFORD DA3 SCHOOL RATIONS! BAR MITZVAHS ARE. TO 0 COSTL_ I I PLEDGE TGJO GOATS FOR TH E MiP121,E-CLASS JEWS -OF AMERICA! - Reality Check Politics By Blindfold I t's kind of funny how many people profess to be horrified at Rupert Murdoch's takeover of the Wall Street Journal. They fear that Murdoch — whom they regard as an alias for Mephistopheles — will extend his own brand of conser- vatism from the editorial page and start slanting the news columns. It's a bit late to start worrying about getting that horse back in the barn. The New York Times, to name one example, has been doing it for years. The paper had to run two major retractions on front- page global warming stories and recently admitted it improperly gave a deep dis- count to moveon.org for its scurrilous ad attacking Gen. David Petraeus. It is still a great newspaper, but I recog- nize its biases and don't trust it on certain issues. So if that also becomes the case at the WSJ, what's the big deal? Oh, I see. That would be slanting the news toward the wrong ideas. Lost my head there for a moment. The politicization of news coverage has 28 October 4 • 2007 partisans in Lansing. been going on for a long time. When the Joint Operating Let the buyer beware is the best Agreement between the advice for newspaper readers. It Detroit dailies began, corn- isn't the way I was taught jour- bined editions were pub- nalism, but it isn't anything new. lished on the weekend and In fact, it's kind of a throwback holidays. I was astonished at to how political writing used to the number of subscribers be in this country. who were outraged at the "The country is so given up (..;olgo Cantor other paper's editorial page to the spirit of party that not to coming into their homes. follow blindfold the one or the It didn't make any differ- other is an inexpiable offense," ence whether it was the Free Press of the wrote John Quincy Adams more than 200 "lunatic left" or the News of the "right years ago, a sentence that could have been wing fanatics:' They didn't even want to composed this morning. look. They seemed to fear that a contrary There is a closing of minds, a refusal even to consider that the party with which idea might pop out and bite them. Or, worse yet, that such ideas were beyond the you disagree may have a point worth lis- pale of reason. tening to. The attitude seeps into so many I get dozens of e-mailed jokes and arti- aspects of life; something as ridiculous as cles each week from friends and relatives. Barry Manilow refusing to appear on the They run the gamut of political beliefs. ABC-TV talk show The View because one Some are antithetical to my own opinions panelist had "dangerous" (i.e. conserva- and some a normal person might find tive) ideas, or as serious as the recent offensive. A lifetime in newspaper work, budget stalemate between the clueless however, has rendered me ineligible for that designation. I would never dream of dashing off an angry response to the sender to demand that they stop forwarding stuff that makes me uncomfortable. But last week, I received just such a furious e-mail from one of my correspondents, upbraiding me for sending her what I thought was a fairly innocuous joke about the lead- ing Democratic presidential candidates. She accused me of trying to "impose" my views on her. Gracious me. I've never imposed a view in my life. I may suggest, argue, endorse. But impose? I think not. Have we become that dour, so unwill- ing to make fun of the ideas we claim to believe in or even to have them chal- lenged? If so, those ideas can't really be worth much. ❑ George Cantor's e-mail address is gcantor614@aol.com .