|
Brown: In Support of Simmons and Academic Freedom
by Zachary Townsend
I want to praise President Simmons' strong sta nce against the University and College Union's motion to boycott Israeli universities - indeed, against even the discussion of such a motion. The motion is a political one, aimed to attack Israeli politics through Israeli universities. The search for objective truth is something quite distinct from politics, and any push toward a politicized university will be likely to produce mere opinion, rather than knowledge. (Brown Daily Herald)
Israel Studies Bring Acclaim to Brandeis
by Ilan Troen
 Israel Studies is not a new subject at Brandeis. For the past four years we have established a record that has gained international recognition of what Israel Studies is and how it can be taught. We have been so successful that nearly 80 faculty members from nearly as many institutions have come to Brandeis for our Summer Institute for Israel Studies to acquire skills for introducing or enhancing courses on Israel on their campuses. All such faculty come with the endorsement of chairs of departments, deans or provosts. The faculty attending the Brandeis seminar have included Jews, Christians and Muslims. The institutions are public, private, liberal arts and Jewish as well as Christian (largely Catholic, but also Baptist) and U.S. military academies (West Point and Air Force). We have also had faculty on this program from Turkey, the UK (Cambridge, Manchester and Reading Universities), Ireland (Trinity University in Dublin), Brazil, Argentina, Australia and the Ukraine. The writer is the director of the Israel Studies Center. (Justice)
Cornell: Mr. Ahmadinejad Goes to Columbia
by Ben Birnbaum
 The controversy over Ahmadinejad’s Columbia visit never was over free speech - nobody serious was disputing Ahmadinejad’s right to say whatever he wished, wherever he happened to be. This was foremost about Columbia’s wisdom (or lack thereof) in granting someone with Ahmadinejad’s resume the unavoidable legitimacy that comes with a brand name like theirs. President Bollinger, who deserves some credit for his strikingly non-deferential introduction of Ahmadinejad, framed the Iranian leader’s visit as an opportunity for robust debate. I’m not sure what debate he envisioned - whether the Holocaust happened? Whether homosexuals should be stoned? But I agree that this forum, at the very least, provided an opportunity for this nut to be challenged. Too many others, however, summed up the value of Ahmadinejad’s visit differently - as an opportunity not to debate this man’s primitive ideas, but to engage him in a dialogue. They seem to believe that the American confrontation with radical Islam is really just the result of one giant miscommunication - and that if we just all get together and hear each other out, we can hammer out our differences. (Cornell Sun)
Emory: Good-bye and Good Riddance, Ahmadinejad
by Grant Wallensky
 Why has the Columbia University administration consistently demonstrated such a lack of understanding for the offensive nature of Ahmadinejad’s presence on campus? Columbia president Lee Bollinger’s citation of free speech and promotion of academic discourse in an intellectually stimulating setting as grounds for entertaining this abominable world leader are shockingly misguided. In the end, Ahmadinejad’s speech at Columbia only reiterated the world leader’s total lunacy. Clearly, the tyrant learned nothing from the tremendous outrage that preceded his arrival in New York. John Coatsworth, the Columbia dean behind the invitation, told Fox News that he, hypothetically, would be open to inviting Adolf Hitler to speak on campus if he was willing to be questioned by the faculty and students. Such a comment shows too strong a focus on the ideals of free speech, and too little for the emotional stability of members of the academic community. No tyrant, be he Hitler or Ahmadinejad, deserves an American platform on which to spew nonsense and hate. (Emory Wheel)
Georgia: Iran Leader Crafts Ignorant Legacy
by Payton Bradford, Hadas Peles, and David Ballard
 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to the United States raises significant concerns for the safety and security of this country and Israel, an important ally in the Middle East. Ahmadinejad, acting against the best interest of his country and his own people, repeatedly has called for the destruction of Israel and has referred to the holocaust as a "fairytale." While Ahmadinejad may be only acting as the puppet figure for the radical mullahs who control him, he serves the dangerous face of the Iranian government to the rest of the world. Ahmadinejad continues to defy the international community in his pursuit of nuclear capabilities. Political activism is the best way to solve the threat of Ahmadinejad. Support for HR1400, the Iran Counter Proliferation Act, is the first step to ensuring that America, as well as the international community, will not have to live with a nuclear Iran. HR 1400 works to close loopholes in existing sanctions law, strengthen U.S. tools to cut off funds to Iran's nuclear program and prohibits U.S. nuclear cooperation with those aiding Iran's atomic efforts. This bill has strong support from both sides of the political aisle. Bradford is president of Young Democrats. Peles is president of Dawgs for Israel and Ballard is chairman of College Republicans. (Red and Black)
Harvard: Ahmadinejad at Columbia
Editorial
 Columbia University President Lee C. Bollinger did academia and the cause of academic freedom proud this week. Bollinger was harshly criticized from all sides for hosting a forum with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and attacking Ahmadinejad in a fiery introduction. But by inviting a powerful and important - though abhorrent - figure and peppering his guest with pointed questions, Bollinger showed the true nature of academic debate: that all are free to speak but none are free from scrutiny. The controversy surrounding an invitation to an Iranian president is not alien to Harvard, which last year attracted similar ire, albeit on a smaller scale, for hosting Ahmadinejad’s predecessor Mohammad Khatami. Bollinger’s introduction of Ahmadinejad also served to further academic discourse. Bollinger’s introduction was mainly focused on the importance of free speech - which is all but absent in Iran - and a series of frank, pointed questions on human rights, Holocaust denial, Israel, Iran’s links to terrorist organizations, and the country’s nuclear program. (Crimson)
Muhlenberg: The Right Call
by Joe Caporoso
 I agree with Columbia's decision to let Ahmadinejad speak. This is a free country. We will listen to everyone's ideas. In Ahmadinejad's case, we will listen to his ideas and then tear him to pieces about the foolishness of his words. He will succeed in doing nothing but presenting Iran as a backward nation, and further the resistance against his leadership. Hopefully, the intelligent people who populate the streets of Iran will realize the downfalls of the people who currently govern them and represent them to the rest of the world. (Muhlenberg Weekly)
Syracuse: Columbia U Uses Double Talk with Dictators
by Shawn O'Donoghue
 It is hard to make sense of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia University. Ahmadinejad represents an off-kilter politician to most Americans. He denies the existence of the Holocaust and publicly calls for the elimination of Israel. It's hard to imagine he thought speaking at a university would change anyone's perception of him. Certainly, no one believed Ahmadinejad would change any of his policies on account of the visit. What ultimately took place at Columbia was a bizarre act of political kabuki. It is easy to denounce state-sanctioned boogey men like Ahmadinejad, but a double-standard becomes apparent when the unsavory characters that need denouncing are backed by the United States. (Daily Orange)
Virginia Tech: Hypocrisy Runs Rampant at Columbia University
by Allison Aldrich
 I find this perplexing because President Ahmadinejad is the leader of a nation that is at the forefront of the battle against homosexuals. This intolerant nation punishes lesbians with public whippings and sentences gay men to beatings and sometimes execution. I'll give Bollinger the benefit of the doubt and assume that he must just be overlooking this slight violation of human rights for the greater good of Columbia and the promotion of free speech on campus. If he would like to avoid being labeled a hypocrite, however, perhaps he could show the same backbone in his defense of the Minuteman Project's president and of ROTC's rights on campus.  (Collegiate Times)
See also Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Peace by Lindsay Bryant, San Jose State Spartan Daily
|
|
Bar-Ilan: The Threat of al Qaeda and its Allies in Lebanon
by Shaul Shay
 Not only do radical Shi'ites threaten the stability of the fragile Lebanese political system, but al-Qaeda-backed Sunnis pose a significant threat. The recent fighting between the Lebanese army and the al-Qaeda-affiliated Fatah al-Islam organization in north Lebanon, and the attacks against UNIFIL forces in south Lebanon, reflect the challenges of radical jihadi Sunni Islam on the stability of the country and the region. The Lebanese government's ability to face the challenges is largely dependant on international support and the consent of local power brokers such as Hizbullah and the Palestinians. (BESA Center for Strategic Studies-Bar-Ilan University)
Cornell: The Dos and Don’ts of Playing Host
by Rob Fishman
What’s on everybody’s mind is the big news: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s controversial appearance at Columbia University. What’s not: Palestinian advocate Dr. Hanan Ashrawi’s speech at Cornell last week. If Bollinger and Ahmadinejad were Columbia’s Odd Couple yesterday, then Cornell’s president and Yasser Arafat’s former spokeswoman were a veritable Sonny and Cher last week. A large crowd heard what Dr. Ashrawi characterized as President David Skorton’s “warm and touching introduction.” While Ashrawi may be viewed as a relatively moderate voice by some, she still acknowledged that Palestinians will never recognize a permanent Israeli state (even while claiming that a two-state solution is necessary), and blamed the election of Hamas - though, as she admitted, “free and fair in technical terms” - largely on the Israeli occupation. From there, she accused the United States of hypocrisy for enforcing sanctions against Hamas, an organization which has openly embraced terrorism, while not endorsing sanctions against Israel. Never in his opening remarks or commentary did our president challenge Ashrawi on her facts. (Cornell Sun)
Duke: Commending Columbia, Despite Gaffes
Editorial
 Columbia should be praised. The fact that Ahmadinejad was given the opportunity to speak reaffirms the value of preserving free speech and open dialogue on college campuses. That said, the event was not without its gaffes. Days before Ahmadinejad's scheduled visit, John Coatsworth, dean of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, defended the university's decision to invite Ahmadinejad on the grounds that he would just as readily welcome Hitler to speak. It was a regrettable context in which to draw a parallel between the Iranian president and the Nazi dictator, and Coatsworth's comments only served to limit the scope of the event and the complex issues at its heart. President Lee Bollinger deserves special citation for upholding free speech in multiple contexts - the speech by a prominent foe of Israel came only weeks after Bollinger authored a letter from an array of American academics condemning a proposed boycott of Israeli academic institutions by British academics. (Duke Chronicle)
Georgetown: No Soapbox for Ahmadinejad
by Ork Skolnik
 Ahmadinejad has a right to his opinions and to express them, no matter how repugnant his words might be. But no university is obliged to lend its stage to bigotry. By allowing him to give an address on campus, Columbia is not protecting Ahmadinejad’s right to free speech. Rather, Columbia is granting the credibility of one of America’s most prestigious universities to one of the world’s most vile living dictators. By lending Ahmadinejad its platform, Columbia is making a statement that Ahmadinejad’s opinions are within the realm of acceptable academic discourse. Columbia is implying that a speech by Ahmadinejad deserves as much weight as any other political or professorial lecture, and considerably more fanfare. (Georgetown Voice)
See also A Victory for Free Speech at Columbia Editorial (Georgetown Voice)
Grove City College: Holocaust Denial, Then and Now
by Paul Kengor
 Well, if you fear Ahmadinejad because of his views on Jews, then there’s no reason why you wouldn’t have feared Saddam just as much. In both word and deed, Saddam was worse than Ahmadinejad. Saddam walked the walk in his anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel. Long before Ahmadinejad was denying the Holocaust, Saddam was calling for a new one, and in fact was firing up the gas chamber. This inherent hatred of Israel was part of Saddam’s being. Saddam was bred a genocidal racist. When the budding despot was an adolescent, the uncle who served as his role model and surrogate father published a pamphlet titled, “Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies.” Saddam lived that credo. Later, as a dictator in the late 1990s, he ramped up the country’s printing presses and reissued his uncle’s pamphlet. It was circulated in untold numbers throughout the nation. The writer is a professor of political science at Grove City College (Frontpage)
IDC: Basher Assad - The Lesser Evil
by Guy Bechor
Is Basher Assad an asset or a liability? Would it serve Israel's purpose if Assad were toppled? Last week a conference attended by the Syrian opposition, united in its hatred to Assad and his regime, convened in Berlin. Hatred of Assad is not their only source of unification. Another unifying factor is their hatred for Israel. If we thought that this opposition would be democratic, pro-Western, and that it would perhaps reach some peace agreement with us, we were mistaken. Conference participants attacked Assad for not maintaining "Syrian honor" and for not embarking on a war against Israel. Clearly, the damage posed by the Assad family is less than the damage likely to be inflicted by the opposition. The writer is head of Middle Eastern Studies at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) in Herzliya. (Ynet News)
Southern Miss: Criticism Improves Iranian President's Popularity
by Chris Deschamp
 Ahmadinejad is very unpopular in Iran right now, largely because the country's economy, which used to just be in the toilet, has now been flushed. This is mainly the fault of Ahmadinejad's economic policy, which I like to call his "Three Step Plan." It goes like this: Step One: Question the Holocaust. Just because there's video footage, written documentation, eye witness testimony and countless items that prove it happened, doesn't necessarily mean it happened. Even some well-respected scholars, like Klan University graduate David Duke, question it. Step Two: Talk about how terrible Israel is. Since the Holocaust didn't happen, it shouldn't even be there, right? Step Three: Talk about how terrible the United States is. Ahmadinejad was elected on a "Hate the U.S. " platform after Iran was called part of the "Axis of Evil," so he's just fulfilling a campaign pledge to hate the U.S., right? Of course, Ahmadinejad, who has denied the Holocaust, claimed in his speech that he hasn't denied the Holocaust - making him a Holocaust denier denier. The point is that he's spent too much time talking about how terrible Israel and the U.S. are, while doing nothing in Iran, where inflation and unemployment keep getting worse. The higher-ups in Iran 's government don't like him, and his party was swept out of power in the last legislative elections because the people don't like him. (Student Printz)
USC: President of Iran's Performance Is a Flop
by Alexander Comisar
 When asked about his claim that Israel should be blown off the map, Iran's president simply and inadequately replied that he loved all nations. Yet, he later contended, as he has in the past, that the Holocaust and its atrocities should be regarded as theory, rather than fact. The speech was riddled with PR, ambiguity and evasion. In fact, the only thing we have learned as a result of this event is that the president of Iran doesn't know a good opportunity when he sees it. Society's monsters are sometimes the people who have the most to teach us. The lessons we learned from Hitler's Holocaust, which, just for clarification, certainly did happen, echo as loudly as those we learn from the saints. (Daily Trojan)
Recent Developments on the Academic Boycott: A Case Study
by Manfred Gerstenfeld
Some of the antiboycotters probably do not act out of sympathy for Israel. Otherwise they would have condemned the boycott on earlier occasions. They started realizing to various degrees that this boycott is a dangerous precedent and will make academia more vulnerable to other attacks. For many of the pro- as well as antiboycotters, then, issues are at stake that go far beyond both the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and academic boycotts. As the debate-which may heat up again after the academic holidays-between pro- and antiboycotters continues, it is clear that if Israeli academia is harmed, British academia will also incur substantial damage. (PHAS/JCPA)
|