That was what liberal academic discourse--free speech, open fora, etc--is all about.

Bollinger for President.

McCain says: "A man who is directing the maiming and killing of American troops should not be given an invitation to speak at an American university."

So, Bush shouldn't be allowed to address U.S. Universities any more? That seems so narrow minded of him.

Do I ever have mixed feelings about this.

On one side, I applaud Bollinger's standing up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. On the other, are we just pushing Iran into a corner where it becomes more isolated and, perhaps, dangerous. Engagement is good. Calling liars on their lies for all the world to see is also good.

What happened today?

The more Ahmadinejad sits opposite over-the-top fire breathers like 60 Minute's Scott Pelley and now this Bollinger firing off Bush administration talking points, the more he looks like the most reasonable man in the room.

I can't imagine George W. Bush speaking to an un-vetted crowd of mothers of dead American soldiers. Bonus if he did it in a flight suit with a mission accomplished banner behind him.

But not a fan of authority figures that act like dicks either. I'm not sure what Bollinger really expected his "guest" to do but it's clear he is clueless about middle eastern culture which requires hospitality towards your guests, even if you don't like them. Basically Bollinger confirmed, in the eyes of people whose cooperation that we are trying to obtain, that we are barbarians.

Thanks, dude.

Something that Bush is too gutless to do.

No wonder Neo-cons did not want Ahmadinejad to have a chance on the American public stage.

Your reaction to Mr. Bollinger's comments is interesting. Some of the factual questions are certainly fair enough but given the forum disingenuous. The Iranian President was there to give a speech, not engage in a debate with Columbia's President. If Mr. Bollinger had posed the questions during the Q & A sessions that would certainly have been fair enough but saying that he doubted that the Iranian President had the intellectual courage to respond to the questions when the Iranian was really in no position to do so is certainly cheating.

As for idiots like Mr. Liberman and his ilk screaming about blood on Iranian hands, what the hell does he think he has on his hands? The blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's killed in an unjustified, illegitimate war. I believe the relevant biblical injunction is: remove the beam from thine eye before you complain about the mote in mine.

..is a coward. Of course he would criticise Ahmedinjad harshly. There's no cost involved. But if the various US, European or Israeli war criminals show up, he's going to suck up big-time. This brave "defender of free discourse" is the same guy who acquiesced in a witch hunt against his own Middle Eastern Studies faculty. Once again, "bravery" is represented as the willingness to angage in attacks on the official enemy, while buckling to the ruling class in our country. Pathetic.

Yes, all these people are making Ahmadinejad look reasonable, which isn't easy to do. Protesters claim they don't want Ahmadinejad spewing his 'hate,' when Bollinger boils over with it. Bollinger has the nerve to call him an intellectual coward? Who's speaking to 'the enemy' on their home turf? Every criticism I've ever seen leveled at Iran, valid though it may be, pales in comparison to what can be said about Saudi Arabia. A dictatorship? Treatment of women and homosexuals? Yet, when was the last time there were mass protests when the Saudi crown prince was visiting? Oh yeah, they're 'our brave friends.'

President Bush facing up to such an obviously hostile crowd and taking questions?

Of course not. Our mighty and fearless leader has gone out of his way to avoid facing such hostility. Every public appearance carefully choreographed. Audiences vetted in advance. Questions pre-screened or even pre-written and given to people who provide the best photo op.

Ahmadinejad, for all his other faults (and there are many), certainly demonstrated more courage then the current occupant of the White House.

Give me a break. Most of what Bollinger said was straight out of Ahmadinejad's own speeches (and before you bring out the tired 'it was all mis-translated' line, let me save you some time; I speak Farsi). Ahmadinejad had the largest forum he has ever had in his career to defend himself and he failed miserably. He has been reduced to a laughing stock which is what a man of limited power and even more limited intelligence deserves. I'm still chuckling over the 'no homosexuals in Iran' line. Bollinger deserves a great deal of credit for saying what no one else in the world has dared say to Ahmadinejad's face. Now if only some equally brave man would do the same to the other coward with limited intelligence , but unfortunately way too much power in this country; I would die happy.

I could not agree more. All through the long debacle beginning with the 2001 attacks, this country has gotten itself into a mess worse and worse by refusing even to try and understand those on the other side, even to the extent of how to treat guests.

Earlier today I watched through the online hookup, but missed the opening remarks. Now I'm glad I did, because I would have been more than a little pissed to see a visiting head of state invited to an American university and then publicly derided. It's not just Middle Eastern hospitality he's violated, it's hospitality, period. It's an ugly thing to do, without question, given that I'm pretty damn sure Bollinger didn't let Ahmedinejad in on the substance of his opening remarks.

It's just another example of the boorish nature of our dealings these days. We just keep insisting on proving what unpleasant, hostile people we are.

He wasn't going to let Columbia get painted as hypocritical yet AGAIN. (remember those students rushing the stage when a conservative spoke - a guy who wants us to patrol our borders??!).

So he slams Pres. A. like he should, but then throws this in:

"your avoiding them (my questions) will in itself be meaningful to us"

Well, why in the hell are you going to bring this guy into the classroom if you don't expect him to speak anything other than his usual propaganda? Why give him more propaganda to spew back in Iran? "Look here, one of the USA's top universities let me speak." I'm thoroughly ashamed to be an ivy leaguer, if his speach at Columbia makes even ONE Iranian think I support their leadership.

That's why Bollinger should have taken the que from EVERY OTHER SCHOOL IN THE COUNTRY, and not invited him.

But, he didn't, so he covered his tracks before the guy spoke. Didn't want any more egg on his face.

Still dispicable.

Honestly, I'm ashamed I let Columbia fly me to their campus for an offical visit. But, on the other hand, can't say the school I ended wouldn't have tripped over itself to give that terrorist a microphone.