Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke today in a controversial appearance at Columbia University. Was it appropriate to invite a man to visit Columbia who has called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth and denied the historical reality of the Holocaust?
Had the president been given an unchallenged venue to pontificate about his worldview the event would have been nothing more than a farce. But Columbia’s president introduced Ahmadinejad by offering an indictment of his record on human rights.
Iran’s leader and their people need to know that the vast majority of the world’s people find Ahmadinejad’s views and policies abhorrent.
Another question comes up here for Christians: We are called to seek reconciliation and peace with those who oppose our communities. Dialogue between those with strong disagreements is important if we are ever to truly bridge the divide.
Perhaps churches here in the United States should be reaching out to religious leaders in Iran and attempt to set-up a system of exchanges with a twin goal of building relationships between Iranians and Americans and a long-term goal of bringing reconciliation between our two nations. Maybe religious people have the potential to do something great in this area.
In the meantime, we need to challenge Iran’s human rights record. At the same time, we ought to be reflecting on our own record and where it falls short.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
If Ahmadinejad was more familiar with American history he could have commented on the continuing revision of our understanding of historical events, such as the Civil War and Reconstruction or the wars against the American Indians. Ironically, in the nineteenth century Columbia Professors William Dunning and John Burgess were instrumental in developing the racist interpretation of the American Civil War and Reconstruction that was prevalent in American academia and education until the 1960's. The Dunning-Burgess school essentially taught that slavery was a benign system, the slaves were docile and contented and emancipation was a fraud perpetrated on the slaves by unscrupulous carpetbagger profiteers from the North. They actually taught that Black people were better under slavery than as free citizens during Reconstruction. Dunning and Burgess taught that Reconstruction failed because Black people were not capable of voting or being citizens in a civilized society. They supported the Jim Crow system of segregation and portrayed the Ku Klux Klan sympathetically. Believe it or not, this was the prevalent historical interpretation taught in American colleges and elementary and secondary schools until the 1960's.
I am going to add some comments about Mr Boolinger,s introduction :
1: The tone from the host of an event was uncivil and uncalled for
2: I believe it was embarrassing to the university, frankly, that they should decide to invite him and then treat him in this manner
3: I was disgusted by the uncivilized behavior by President Bollinger
4: Instead of behaving like a scholar, he behaved like a hooligan
5: Mr. Bollinger’s speech was counterproductive.
6: If you invite someone, you have to be polite. If you permit someone to come into your home, you should treat him with dignity and respect. It was not a good teaching experience.
7: I will be surprised if there are “any long-term price” for Mr. Bollinger’s remarks
8: Mr. Bollinger vigorously strove to keep his name in the media spotlight, despite his lack of importance.
He could have just pointed out that as the president of a university, he has no understanding of tact or the need for diplomacy when dealing with foreign heads of state.
Also, apropos of nothing much, I think he looks strikingly like a leprechaun.
Conclusion: Mr. Ahmadinejad has much to thank Bollinger for, he couldn’t have asked for a better propaganda speech to show around the world. Thanks for making us look like hypocrites Bollinger.
Yes we have freedom of speech here, but only after we lob 20 or 30 ad hominem attacks at you…
Check out this article on the Mennonite and religious community's work to bridge deeper dialogue as as means of fostering peace. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/world/middleeast/27clerics.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Post a Comment