Columbiagate: An Alumna's Point of View

Interestingly enough, the day that Columbia University announced it was hosting the world's most famous hypocrite and Holocaust denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I received my seventeen-thousandth solicitation of the year urging me to give to the Columbia College Fund. I, myself, am a formerly proud member of the Columbia College Class of 1994, and am suddenly several thousand dollars richer than I would have been had the mailing arrived a few days earlier.

In fact, I'm not alone. At dinner last night, one of my closest friends told me she had instructed her trust attorney to amend her will, which was documented to leave a considerable sum to Columbia upon her passing -- no longer. And I'm afraid for my alma mater's sake that these will be far from original stories as the future unfolds.

Oh, by the way, I completely understand WHY President Lee Bollinger invited one of the key architects of the Iran Hostage Crisis circa 1979, no doubt Tarbiat Modarres University's most notorious student. (See the phenomenal book, Guest of the Ayatollah by Mark Bowden). The attention drawn to the school is unparalleled, and President Lee Bollinger can promote himself as the guardian of constitutionally guaranteed free speech, holding aloft ideals with outstretched arms echoing the statue of alma mater, her outstretched arms gracing the top of Low Library's iconic steps at mid-campus. This, however, is part in parcel of a long pattern of welcoming irascibles to campus. Just last week, the school canceled an invite a campus group had extended to the controversial anti-immigrant group, The Minute Men, due in much part of overwhelming student outrage. And it welcomed Louis Farrakhan and his band of merry men to speak back in the dark ages when I was a student there. But this time, even with outcry from students, parents, the mayor of the city, even the president of the United States, Bollinger continued on with his own agenda, and his actions seem flat-out reprehensible.

I also don't understand, as an alumna and a journalist, the point of inviting such a controversial subject to a wildly controversial interview, and then lighting into him with a vitriolic opening statement, denouncing his government, his governing style, his very person. How in Andrew Hamilton's name are we to glean honest, thoughtful, introspective answers from a man known for dodging the simplest of questions, if the introduction goes beyond taunting to downright disrespectful. The New York Times' Maureen Dowd today called the opening oratory, "the meanest introduction in the history of introductions." Boy, THAT'S going to really make him open up. Goodbye Dr. Phil, Hello Dr. Bollinger.

At least when he was done stealing the stage for himself, Bollinger asked more relevant questions than those selected for the edited broadcast interview Scott Pelley presided over on 60 Minutes this past Sunday.

PELLEY: What trait do you admire in President Bush?

AHMADINEJAD: Again, I have a very frank tone. I think that President Bush needs to correct his ways.

PELLEY: What do you admire about him?

AHMADEINEJAD: He should respect the American people.

PELLEY: Is there anything? Any trait?

AHMADINEJAD: As an American citizen, tell me what trait do you admire?

PELLEY: Well, Mr. Bush is, without question, a very religious man, for example, as you are. I wonder if there's anything that you've seen in President Bush that you admire.

AHMADEINEJAD: Well, is Mr. Bush a religious man?

PELLEY: Very much so. As you are.

Are you kidding me? What kind of tree would you be would have been a more probing question. What a waste of a few precious minutes of broadcast time. Perhaps one on Israel or the Holocaust? I felt like I was watching a hostile episode of The View.

But I digress. As with most things in life, this comes back to money, and in this case, a lack there of it. I am more than curious to see what Ahmadinejadapalooza will do to Columbia's fundraising goals for this year, and for the foreseeable future. I feel for the hundreds of students who depend on alumni contributions to pay their own tuitions. I am concerned about fundraising to appoint the world's top academics, to continue to make Columbia one of the most prestigious universities in the world. But, I am afraid that Bollinger put his money where his mouth was, and pretty soon, he'll be going hungry.

Comments

[progresemulo]

I was under the impression that that many children of the Middle East oil oligarchs actually go to Columbia as students. Where are the protests against them?

[matahari888]

A little bit update....­I watch 60minutes, as above....S­uzy....whi­ch 60minutes are you refering too??? why you turn around the fact...whi­le millions people watching????:

PELLEY : President Bush is a very religious person.

Ahmadinejad : Oh really? what religious?? religiousman who attach two country and occupying them?? Is chistianity teach that???
If my words here is not post that's find...hey­, you might want to hear just what pleased you...

[placidwilbur]

You feel for the students?

They're fortunate to be at a place that doesn't sell censorship rights to you or other alumnae. The ability to choose speakers without regard to an alumna's whims is worth more to Columbia's future and students than any money it might miss out on from disgruntled would-be donors.

Last year, I saw a speech by John Yoo (legal adviser to GWB and staunch Guantanamo/torture advocate). He demonstrated that he is brilliant, and his arguments against my strongest principles were tough and thought-provoking. I despise him as much now as I did then, but I'm a lot more informed and I have much better reasons for my views. You might well "feel for" students like me. Personally, I feel for any student who's been deprived of that kind of experience by alumnae in your position, and I hope my university is never run by someone who'd prioritize fundraising over academic freedom.

[Potomacker]

And what kind of message does not sending in a check with those damned solicitations to give to one's alma mater? Should Columbia University conclude, if the numbers are down, that there's juts no more profitability in maintaining the institution as a forum for discussion and ideas? Should they then scrap the whole universality of university and become nothing more than a school of Jewish studies, as Bollinger, noted and a campus for jingoism and neocon sympathizers?
What if on the other hand, a decrease in donations is instead interpreted as an indictment of the embarrassing introduction given to a visiting speaker by President Lee "1st amendment" Bollinger? What do you think office of development would conclude if President Bollinger is allowed to decide for them?

[altohone]

Quite the vague post that doesn't make clear if it was Bollingers intro or the invite that draws your ire. I can understand your complaint about Bollinger, but if you worry about donations suffering due to the invite or are encouraging the withholding of them, I urge you to read some of the other posts on HuffPo which clearly defend the idea of academic freedom and discussion.

A school that subsists on donations from those who would limit such freedom isn't worth attending.

A little context in the piece would be nice though.

You apply the label "the world's most famous hypocrite" to Ahmedinjad when Bush clearly rivals or surpasses him.

In comparison to the Saudis, Iran has more freedom including for women. Political repression is no worse or better than in Egypt, another ally.

Ahmedinajad did not deny the Holocaust in his appearance at Columbia..­. he said "if it happened, why should the Palestinians suffer for it" (some would call that an erosion of his ignorance). Calling for more research on the subject puts him in league with Exxon and Bush in their approach to global warming.

Granted, Bush, Exxon, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are poor company to keep or role models to emulate, but the "Iran as most evil" spiel isn't exactly defensible.

Like it or not, those playing that game are climbing into bed with Cheney.

[matahari888]

I agree with you....
The post above mentioned " ....Columb­ia one of the most prestigious universities in the world...." hm..hm...n­ot anymore, I don't think so. Worldwide right now think that columbia just same like other media crap full propaganda. Bollingers act once again proof that to the world.....

[thoughttheater]

See a tongue-in-cheek graphic titled "Mahmoud Dearest", which has a little fun with the Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his unbelievable comments at Columbia University­...particu­larly the one whereby he asserts that there aren't any gays in Iran...her­e:

http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/09/mahmoud_dearest_scrubbing_the_gay_out_of_iran.php

[JacktheBlogger]

As a fellow alumni of the Columbia Business School (class of '91), I agree.

We maybe a great democracy, but Columbia's president, Lee Bollinger, with his uncouth and "unwelcoming" remarks in introducing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, proved that we are a lousy host. I wish I did not have to qualify my remarks with the usual denunciation of the Iranian president to be taken seriously. Nonetheless, since when did anybody anywhere in the world invite somebody into their home and then publicly berate them before they have had an opportunity to be heard.

I was very disappointed by Mr. Bollinger's shabby treatment of his guest. One of the great rules of public discourse is that you don't have to lower yourself to the level of your opponent. By his opening rant, Mr. Bollinger made Mr. Ahmadinejad's subsequent howlers appear less damaging than they should have and, in effect, let his style trump Ahmadinejad's substance.