Columbia University Democrats

Ahmadinejad, in his infinite wisdom, has decided that we should continue to investigate the Holocaust like we continue to question physics…

… becuase they’re clearly very similar. And we have no research or evidence about concentration camps, or the number of dead – while Ahmadinejad says “there are no absolutes” I’m pretty sure that death is absolute.

He’s starting to make those people who question evolution or global warming sound sane…

**”Do you, or your government, seek the destruction of the state of Israel as a Jewish state”

“We love all nations; we are friends with the Jewish people. There are many Jews in Iran living peacefully with security.”

Now he is talking about the special Jewish MP in Iran (despite having too small a population).

He stated that Palestinians must decide about their future themselves–as part of Greater Palestine, of course, not the Palestinian territories.

**”Mr. President, I think many members of our audiences would like to hear a clearer answer to that question.” And he asked for a yes or no answer.

“You asked the question and then you want the answer the way you want to hear it…” He is calling this a Palestinian issue, not an international issue. Of course, he is not a Palestinian, either… “Our solution is a free referendum.”

**”Why is your government providing aid to terrorists. Would you stop doing so and provide international monitoring to prove you have stopped.”

He is now claiming that the Iranian nation is a victim of terrorism. “The elected president of Iran and the elected prime minister of Iran lost their lives.” He is referring here to the assassination of Mohammad. This goes on for some time.

**”A further set of questions challenge your view of the Holocaust. Since the evidence that this occurred in Europe in the 1940s from the actions of the Nazi government. Since this is well-document, why are you asking for more research?…” This is a silly question–he is simply going to argue for ongoing research in all topics, and he is now doing so. Questions need to be tougher than they have been so far. Maybe he should be asked whether he thinks the Holocaust occurred…

He said, “I am not saying that this didn’t happen at all. That is not the judgment I am passing here.” He appears to have just said that the Holocaust did happen, and he wants to know why it has to affect the Palestinian people.

**The next question is about persecution of women in public society and homosexuals.

“Freedoms in Iran are genuine, true freedoms. The Iranian people are free. Women in Iran enjoy the highest levels of freedom. We have two vice presidents that are female at the highest levels of speciality; in our parliaments, in our governments in our universities, they are present…” He is now accusing the American government of spreading falsehoods about freedom in Iran.

“But as for the executions, I like the wasted questions. If someone comes and establishes a network for illicit drug trafficking…” We do object to executing them, but I don’t think those are the most objectionable cases. “Don’t you have capital punishment in the United States? You do, too.” Yeah, let’s do something about that. Look whose company we keep.

**”The question was about sexual preference and women”

“In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country. We don’t have that in our country.” Finally, something completely and totally absurd! And laughter! “In Iran, we don’t have this phenomenon, we don’t know who’s told you that we have it.” “Maybe you think that being a woman is a crime; it’s not a crime to be a woman.” That’s nice to hear, even if the explanation was a bit draped in religious language, but let’s hear about your government’s complete failure to reflect that view in its policies…

Women are “exempted from legal responsibilities” out of respect! Oh, how nice. I can’t believe we missed that one the first time. “We are proud of this culture.” Well, that’s nice.

**”What did you hope to accomplish by visiting Columbia today, and what would you have said if you were permitted to visit the site of the September 11th tragedy.”

“Well here I’m your guest… In Iran, when you invite a guest, you respect them…” Now he is talking about the rejection of his invitation to Ground Zero. He just wanted to pay respect! Blah blah blah. This is not interesting.

“I wanted to speak with the press. The September 11th tragedy was a huge event. It led to a lot of events afterward…” And then Iraq and Afghanistan. “Insecurity, terror, and fear” in “our region” for six years.

Now he is talking about “root causes” of 9/11, but he doesn’t say anything specific about them.

*”…Why is your government seeking to acquire enriched uranium, suitable for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. Will you stop doing so?”

He is, of course, claiming still that his nuclear program is peaceful, that it is within the law, and that he will not refine uranium above the 5% weapons threshold. Now he is complaining again about the monopoly on nuclear technology (he should be challenged on the inconsistency of this with his statement that he supports IAEA regs, which codify this monopoly.”

A joke! “I think the politicians that are after atomic bombs–making them, testing them–I think that politically they are backward, retarded.” Ha ha?

**”…How do you see resolution of the points of conflict between the United States and Iran?”

He can obviously just argue here that they are ready to talk to all nations and that Bush will not talk to him. This is one of the most damning weaknesses of Bush foreign policy–a world leader that fails to engage others denies his entire nation leverage in challenging the terrible foreign policy of other world leaders. The Bush administration is completely to blame for the lack of useful, specific disputes to which questioners might be able to allude in pointedly criticizing Iranian foreign policy as it relates to the United States.

He is now bashing American support for Saddam in the Iran-Iraq War, another idiotic Republican venture that has destroyed our ability to challenge other world leaders from moral high ground.

He is thanking the audience. Pat yourselves on the backs.

He is inviting Columbia faculty and students to Iran, to speak to their university students. Ok, let’s get the administration to put up some money and pay for a trip! This could be interesting, and challenging Ahmadinejad on his home ground could really put more pressure on him than challenging him in New York. I wonder if the invitation will still stand a week from now.

“Best of luck to all of you.” How nice. Ahmadinejad must now leave to give his UN speech. The questions could have been more tough, but this was interesting overall. The real test of our country will be whether American foreign policy starts to directly challenge Ahmadinejad similarly, or whether we continue to restrict opportunities for debate to the occasional visit to a college campus with more foreign policy legitimacy than the White House.

Do you seek the destruction of Israel?

“We love all nations and we’re friends with the jewish people? Many jews living in Iran peacefully… “

… and yet… denies the holocaust.

“Democratic proposal to the palestinian plight for a sixty year old problem and let the palestinians decide for themselves and determine their own fate.”

AND SIPA PRESSES FOR A CLEARER ANSWER WITH A YES OR NO ANSWER.

Damn it’s good to be a Columbia student today.

Ahmadinejad is now asking questions of his own. To paraphrase…

As he remains primarily an academic who teaches university courses, he addresses us a fellow academic, but was attacked by “certain groups”. “Palestine is an old wound.” Repeating “sixty years” and outlining all of the bad results of the Israeli occupation. Nothing incorrect so far, but I bet he’s going to finish with something just a bit offensive. “As an academic, I ask two questions”:

1. “Given that the HOlocaust is a present reality of our time, a history that occurred, why is there not sufficient research that can approach the topic from different perspectives?” Uh, right… “There are researchers who want to approach the topic from different perspectives, why are they being put in prison?” Fine, Europeans shouldn’t be putting Holocaust deniers in prison–I agree–but calling these people “academics” is beyond ludicrous. And the Holocaust is not nuclear physics–it’s pretty clear what happened.
2. “Given this historical event, if it is a reality, we still need to …?… why the Palestinian people need to pay for it.” And so on–you can guess the rest.

Now he’s talking about Iranian nuclear ambitions. Since the bylaws of the IAEA state that member states have the right to peaceful nuclear technology, he wonders why his program is a problem? He is apparently going to stand by his claim that Iran only has peaceful nuclear ambitions, which no one really believes. He’s also challenging Americans about our insistence on a right to nuclear energy. Unfortunate that his solution is more nuclear proliferation instead of a reduction in existing use of nuclear technology.

I doubt that spare parts for civilian aircraft are really a major plank of Iranian nuclear energy policy.

“We are a peaceful, loving nation–we love all nations”. And scene. Questions now.

“All researchers and scientists are loved by God” which is why Ahmadinejad locks up and tortures those who disagree with him and restricts scientific research in Iran…