The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Two basic arguments were employed by those who defended Columbia's invitation to Ahmadinejad. The first was a straw man--that he shouldn't be "barred" from speaking at campus. But given that most critics weren't calling for the NYPD to prevent Ahmadinejad from speaking, this was not the issue. The argument was not over whether Columbia had the right to invite him, but whether it was right to invite him.

The second defense was that by holding Ahmadinejad up to tough questioning, it would show him for who he was. But none of the absurd statements he made at Columbia gave us any better insight into what a lunatic he is than his past statements.

Meanwhile, via Michael Rubin I see this account of the speech from the official Iranian news agency, which includes the line, "The audience on repeated occasion applauded Ahmadinejad when he touched on international crises." So, he clearly obtained the propaganda victory he sought at a time when he is losing popularity at home as a result of his economic policies.

topics:
Iran

Leave a comment

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

Related Blog Posts

More Blog Posts by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/blog/2007/09/25/final-thoughts-on-ahmadinejad
ADVERTISEMENT

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Who Castrated Ann Coulter?

David Catron | 2.6.12

Bigoted Barack, Red in Tooth and Clause

George Neumayr | 2.10.12

Unsafe at Any Smoke

Eric Peters | 2.10.12

Access This

Ross Kaminsky | 2.10.12

The Delousing of a Movement

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 2.9.12

Justice Ginsburg Should Resign

William Tucker | 2.8.12

The Show Me State's No Show Primary

Andrew B. Wilson | 2.10.12

No Double Play

Peter Hannaford | 2.10.12

ADVERTISEMENT