Columbia and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Monday's appearance of the terrorist and Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Columbia University as a part of his visit to the UN has generated a lot of discussion. It should. The tensions here are profound and they should be.

The underlying principle of a university should be a locus of broad discussion and debate. By many measures Columbia does not measure up to that standard. It currently prohibits military recruiting on campus and gave an unruly welcome to the head of the Minutemen (a right wing nutter). Ahmadinejad should be a reviled figure in the world. He was a part of the group of Islamic terrorists who captured and detained American diplomatic personnel during the Carter administration. He denies the Holocaust. He consistently has called for the extermination of the nation of Israel. He seems to be trying to develop nuclear weapons for his country. He has been accused of killing people who disregard Islamic precepts in his country and advocating the same for people outside it.

There is also the distinct possibility that the Iranian leader will use this appearance as a propaganda tool. In the same way that David Duke used his public appearances to highlight how intelligent he could appear this guy will use any video selectively. His most recent American appearance on TV, with Mike Wallace, should have been an embarrassment to American journalism. Wallace looked and acted like a lapdog and allowed Ahmadinejad to lay out his bizarre ideas without challenge. Wallace pitched so many softballs to the Iranian leader it was troubling.

There is some discussion about him also trying to go to Ground Zero where the World Trade Center was. Here the issue is less complex - he should not be allowed to go.

Some of the opponents to the appearance have asked whether a university would have allowed Hitler to appear in 1939 - and the answer to that rhetorical canard should have been absolutely. But in both cases that should only be on certain conditions. He should not be allowed to enter the forum without an assurance that alternative points of view can be included in the appearance.

Even with that on balance, and were the university to allow the kind of debate and discussion that should go on in this kind of forum, I would be supportive of having him coming to campus to speak. I am not confident that Columbia will allow the kind of free questioning of the speaker that they should. The Wallace interview is also not a good bellweather. Wallace allowed himself to be a pawn of Ahmadinejad's rants. The Iranian leader proved himself to be a skillful propagandist when he appeared with Wallace - but I suspect if the University follows what it should that students and professors in the audience will prove a more equal match.