4A - Wednesday, September 26, 2007

The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu

KARL STAMPFL
EDITOR IN CHIEF

IMRAN SYED
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR

JEFFREY BLOOMER
MANAGING EDITOR

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles
and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Academic value
Valuing free speech means allowing speech we oppose
t's easy to be a free-speech advocate when there is nothing
controversial being said. It's a lot harder when the speak-
er is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Although
Columbia University President (and former University of Michi-
gan president) Lee Bollinger was challenged for allowing a plat-
form for Ahmadinejad's offensive political views, it should be
remembered that free speech is not only for those whose ideas
may be agreeable, but also for those whose opinions are disagree-
able. Far from being an anomaly worthy of ridicule, Columbia's
decision is an example for all academic institutions, our own
chief among them, to follow.

I mean, it was exactly the same even
though it's run by blacks."
- Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly on Sylvia's, a restaurant in Harlem
CHRIS KOSLOWSKI |
Youdo realiethatebhe A ctwhat if the tableswe Just because the Da's sole
"Faineos" tDocoine is sthing tuied? Watif owy ice mu'ay u
but an attempt by the Left to the Daily published so j cartoon bulI doesn't make
cuntrol ccnservrativre spe cthisg leftisttthey had gig an imbarancedpublication.
th vensaent regultion equal spuceto the opsg *
Suncommon leader

0

Already in New York City for his appear-
ance at the United Nations Sunday, Ahma-
dinejad was invited to speak and answer
questions at Columbia for its annual World
Leaders Forum Monday morning. Following
an unnecessarily harsh introduction from
Bollinger, who called him a "petty and cruel
dictator," Ahmadinejad went on his usual
rant, questioning the Holocaust, stating that
gays do not exist in Iran, dodging a question
about whether Iran is supplying terrorists
with weapons and declaring that Iranian
women are "the freest in the world."
Despite the controversy, the roughly
two-hour presentation achieved exactly
what was expected: Everyone got a chance
to speak, and the radical ideas of Ahma-
dinejad were exposed for what they are. By
giving Ahmadinejad a platform to speak,
Bollinger put him and his views under the
scrutiny of the public eye. Like all irrational
arguments, Ahmadinejad's stances can't
withstand examination, as was blatantly
obvious with the eruption of laughter from
the audience when Ahmadinejad said that
gays do not exist in Iran. Dialogue didn't
empower Ahmadinejad, as many crit-
ics from both sides of the aisle, including
President Bush and Sen. Hillary Clinton,
claimed. It made him look ridiculous.
This type of dialogue should be more com-

mon in today's society, especially on college
campuses and in academic circles. In these
arenas, where education is the key, opposing
viewpoints, when relevant, should be given a
microphone. By giving each side a platform,
everyone is better informed, which should
be precisely the goal of a university.
Although the circumstances that allowed
Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia were
unique, our own university shouldn't shy
away from these types of dialogues either.
While it's perhaps not completely fair to
wonder what University President Mary
Sue Coleman would have done in this situ-
ation, Coleman has not expressed the same
desire as Bollinger to engage in dialogue
on controversial issues. Whereas Bollinger
welcomed opposing viewpoints while at
the University and now at Columbia, for
example, Coleman allowed members of
Students Organizing for Labor and Eco-
nomic Equality to be arrested earlier this
year when they protested the University's
apparel policy at her office. Compared to
Ahmadinejad, the SOLE protestors are
hardly even controversial.
Universities are designed to be centers
of free speech and academic freedom. Bol-
linger upheld that value Monday. Coleman
and others need to do more to follow his
example.

L ee Bollinger always had a
celebrity streak. The Colum-
bia University president who
is now toasted
as an unabashed
champion of free
speech - or rise 3
abhorred as the lat-
est to embody Ivy
League arrogance,
that never really
seems to fade - got 8
his first taste of the IMRAN
national spotlight SYED
while serving as
president right here
at the University of Michigan.
The University's two affirmative
action cases that came before the U.S.
Supreme Court in 2003 named Bol-
linger as the sole defendant (though he
had already left Michigan for Colum-
bia). Those cases came to be the ral-
lying point for all major American
universities that believed in the use of
affirmative action to achieve diversity.
Although the ultimate decisions were
split, the University was seen as an
unwavering defender of racial diver-
sity in academia.
For Bollinger, the Columbia trained
lawyer and First Amendment scholar,
affirmative action was naturally his
fight. And he fought it more actively
than most other presidents would
have. What really separates Bollinger,
however, is that he never stopped
fighting. He has remained outspoken
on hot-button issues affecting college
campuses and American society as a
whole. Beloved for his enthusiasm (as
shown by the loud ovation he received,
even amid protesters, as he stepped
up to speak before Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday),
he is also often criticized, even at his
own campus, for sometimes picking
the wrong fight and going too far.
For most who have followed Bol-
linger since his time at Michigan, it
was no shock to find his name and
strong sentiments in the center of a
full-page ad in The New York Times
on Aug. 8. Writing on behalf of the
nearly 300 university presidents who
co-signed the statement, Bollinger
was blunt and direct in his criticism
of the vote by Britain's University and
College Union to boycott Israeli insti-

tutions and academics.
"We will not hold intellectual
exchange hostage to the political dis-
agreements of the moment," Bollinger
wrote. With nearly all of American
academia and probably an overwhelm-
ing majority of public opinion behind
him in that context, however, that
statement was hardly intrepid.
Not even two months later, the
winds shifted considerably. To his
credit, Bollinger stayed true to his
course. Bucking everything from criti-
cism to slander to downright character
assassination, Bollinger backed up the
words he wrote in that ad. He proved
that, at least in him, there is a genuine
desire for open debate and contested
disagreement to counter-act the sti-
fling nature of sociopolitical discourse
in America and abroad over the past
few years.
Ahmadinejad spoke his ignorantdia-
tribes, Bollinger and others skewered
him mercilessly and Columbia Univer-
sity is a more open place today than it
was last week. To say that this is a fine
example for other university presidents
to follow is a gross understatement;
serving as platforms for opinions that
matter in the world, regardless of how
inflammatory they might be, is one of
the main purposes of institutions of
higher learning.
Unfortunately, many institutions
have forgottenthis role,especiallysince
Sept. 11. Most, like our own university,
would never deny that it is their role to
sometimes host unpopular viewpoints,
but few have been assertive in creating
that discourse. Dialogue isn't some-
thing that simply happens: It must be
actively facilitated.
The problem of stifled debate is even
larger outside of academia. The Bush
administration's refusal to talk to cer-
tain governments, supposedly as pun-
ishment for their actions, has led to a
more polarized and misunderstood
world. Our leaders fail to realize that
you can't get rid of rogue governments
by pretending they don't exist. We
must talk to them because they control
a piece of our world.
We need people like Bollinger in
government and international affairs.
It's not such a crazy thought; it's cer-
tainly been done before.
Perhaps it's no surprise that the

most hopelessly idealistic president
in history, Woodrow Wilson, was
first and foremost an academic. A
professor at Bryn Mawr College and
Wesleyan University, Wilson served
as president of Princeton University
from 1902-1910 before moving on to
politics. His record certainly isn't
squeaky clean, but Wilson's idealism
spawned a whole school of thought in
international relations. His leadership
in World War I was measured and
sure: His ideal of world peace through
democracy and the League of Nations
remains our goal today.
Bollinger proves our
best leaders are on
college campuses.
The parallels between Wilson and
Bollinger are easily overstated, but
there are plenty of other examples to
consider, even at Columbiaitself.There
was Seth Low, mayor of Brooklyn
and then of a unified New York City,
who had an 11-year tenure as Colum-
bia president in between. President
Dwight Eisenhower made a stopover as
university president at Columbia after
his service in World War II and before
his tenure as president of the United
States. Bollinger's immediate prede-
cessor at Columbia, George Erik Rupp
now serves as president of the Interna-
tional Rescue Committee, an advocacy
group for refugees worldwide.
Academics tend to shy away from
leading roles in government because
they see its ways as beneath them.
Certainly there is much change to be
effected in our society through what
happens at college campuses - Bol-
linger and Columbia proved that much
this week. Yet the open-mindedness,
true debate and negotiation that works
on that level is also sorely missed in
government.
Maybe Bollinger can lead the way
once more.
Imran Syed is the Daily's
editorial page editor. He can be
reached at galad@umich.edu.

0

Editorial Board Members: Kevin Bunkley, Ben Caleca, Milly Dick, Mike Eber, Brian
Flaherty, Gary Graca, Emmarie Huetteman, Theresa Kennelly, Gavin Stern, Jennifer
Sussex, Neil Tambe, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Wagner
ISRAEL IDEA
'It's 1938 and Iran is Germany'

SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU

Columbia University's decision to invite
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
to speak was disgusting and contradictory
to our nation's beliefs, values and principles.
While free speech is an essential foundation
of America and our academic institutions, it
has conditions and constraints.
Presenting Ahmadinejad in a university
setting insinuates that the dictator holds an
opinion that is one side of a legitimate debate.
The trouble is, there is no such debate. There
is nothing to debate about murder, oppres-
sion, violence, destruction, manipulation and
lies. Ahmadinejad does not hold a legitimate
perspective. There is no relativism here:
Such debate should not be tolerated, espe-
cially at a prestigious university. Columbia
did not create a forum for stimulating intel-
lectual discourse, but rather gave a murderer
a legitimate vehicle to further spread his pro-
paganda.
Ahmadinejad time and time again has
delivered vulgar and hostile comments, call-
ing the Holocaust a myth, calling for the
destruction of the Jewish state of Israel and
pleading for additional insurgent operations
in Iraq. Unfortunately, this vehement rheto-
ric has been backed with action - Ahmadine-
jad's regime directly perpetuates the growth
of terrorist organizations like Hezbollah,
as well as continuously propelling violent
unrest in Iraq.
Our nation's soldiers die in the line of duty,
fightingto instill basic human rights in a place
which has only known oppression and fear
for many years. Meanwhile, Ahmadinejad
and his tyrannical government deploy revo-
lutionary guard troops and supply IEDs to al
Qaeda factions, wreaking havoc in Baghdad
and around Iraq. Not only are his policies a
threat to Iraq, but his unfettered support for
Hezbollah, calls to wipe Israel off the map
and continued nuclear ambitions are at the
very least unnerving.
Ahmadinejad's regime is clearly a state
sponsor of terrorism. This should not come as
a surprise to us. Hezbollah has always seized
opportunities to strike American interests -
one need only look back to the Beirut Marine
barrack bombings of 1983, which accounted
for 241 American deaths. Before Sept. 11,
Hezbollah proudly claimed the title of being
the terrorist organization responsible for the
most American causalities. Ahmadinejad
funds and supports terrorism while walking

freely on American soil.
There is immense irony in allowing him
to speak at a university - a place where stu-
dents thrive in effecting positive change.
Under Ahmadinejad's watch, Iran forbids
gay and women's advocacy groups, be it on
a campus or anywhere else in society. In
fact, Ahmadinejad declared in his speech
at Columbia that Iran is completely devoid
of gays! Perhaps this is reminiscent of the
notorious, "Final Solution." As former Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyaho has
repeatedly argued, "People, wake up, its 1938
and Iran is Germany."
Everything this modern day Hitler
embodies and promotes starkly contrasts our
country's cherished values. Instead of life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Ahma-
dinejad's regime houses a "morality police"
to enforce "crimes" such as homosexuality
and expressions of women's rights, implic-
itly eliminating individual freedom of speech
and expression.
Daniel Pipes, an acclaimed expert on the
Middle East who will be speaking on campus
on Oct.8, commented recently on the Iranian
nuclear threat. He wrote, "Bolstered by the
economic windfall from oil and gas sales, the
regime since mid-2005, has at almost every
turn adopted the most aggressive steps to
join the nuclear club, notably by beginning
nuclear enrichment in February." The threat
is real, and Iran's nuclear intentions are
becoming more lucid by the second. Pipes's
talk is sure to be engaging and insightful - a
discussion not to be missed.
One last thought: As Ahmadinejad stood
behind a podium at Columbia, his regime
oppressed and murdered innocent citizens.
While he stood on the stage delivering his
speech, his regime was actively assisting in the
murder of more American troops in Iraq and
providing funds to the same terrorist orga-
nizations that have attacked America and its
allies around the world. And, as Pipes pointed
out, his government continues to seek nuclear
proliferation. Instead of being entertained as
a leader whose perspective must be under-
stood through valid intellectual discussion,
he should have been escorted off that stage in
handcuffs and arrested as a criminal.
Ben Kaminsky, Eitan Ingall and Ari
Siegel are members of Israel IDEA and
are writing on behalf of the group.

Bollinger's harsh treatment of
Ahmadinejad was uncalled for

Zero associate
of many Amer
were ignorantf
Saddam Husse
was simply a s

TO THE DAILY: Spectators
I find myself disappointed by the actions of former Uni- ments Ahmadi
versity of Michigan President Lee Bollinger. Faced with Monday afterr
the prospect of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadine- makes similarl
jad coming to speak at Columbia University, Bollinger Both leaders c.
chose the least responsible option available to him. importantly, in
Bollinger could have simply refused to grant Ahma- ed itself in viol
dinejad a chance to speak, claiming his opinions were So why do
not welcome. Alternatively, he could have allowed Wannabe" wh
Ahmadinejad to speak for himself, giving him the does the resp
opportunity to make a fool out of himself as he always dismiss him as
does. In hindsight this is actually what he did, with Before we d
comments as ridiculous as the assertion that Iran is ourselves with
devoid of homosexuals. This level of ot
instead, Bollinger decided to verbally assault the man, be reasonablec
denouncing him as the "enemy" and a fanatic whom he the same critic
invited to answer to the "civilized world." Ironically,
there was nothing "civilized" about Bollinger's actions. David Boyle
By stooping to this level, Bollinger displayed the same LSA sophomore
arrogance and inflated sense of self-importance that
caused him to bolt from the University for the Ivy
League in the first place. JASON MAI
I'm just glad he was not able to use our University as a
platform from which to condition the American people
to prepare for the war on Iran that is surely coming.

s him with this catastrophe in the minds
ican people, especially those people who
enough to believe a few years earlier that
in contributed to the attacks. This move
pectacle.
would agree that many of the state-
nejad has made in the past and made on
noon are absurd. But our own president
y brazen statements on a daily basis too.
asually use fallacious rhetoric. But more
only one case has this rhetoric manifest-
ence.
people hold up signs that read "Hitler
en Ahmadinejad comes to speak? Why
ected president of Columbia University
a "petty dictator" before the event?
demonize this man, we should concern
our own petty dictator in power now.
utrage toward Ahmadinejad's visit would
only if President Bush were subjected to
ism prior to his speeches.
HIAKIAN

0

Farhad Agharahimi
Alum
We should hold Bush to same
standard as Ahmadinejad
TO THE DAILY:
The protests in New York City on Monday condemn-
ing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were
bizarre, considering America's own democratically
elected president. How can these protestors, as well as
Columbia University President Lee Bollinger and Sec.
of State Condoleezza Rice, speak in such a hostile tone
toward a world leader who has done so little in compari-
son to our own elected leader? Based on the signs many
of the protestors were holding, you would think that
Ahmadinejad started an unprecedented war of aggres-
sion at the cost of thousands of innocent lives.
The decision to forbid Ahmadinejad from visiting
Ground Zero was nothing but propaganda. In reality,
the Shiite state of Iran in no way contributed to these
attacks. DenyingAbmadinejad the right to visit Ground

E
A
a
aaxr
ti