46 Comments
A Fox producer told Bwog yesterday that Chris Kulawik would be going on with Jamie Colby to oppose Columbia’s decision to host President Ahmadinejad. In typical face-off style, the anchor had him as a counterpoint to journalism school student Bess Kargman, who was supposed to argue in favor of the visit. In fact, they both did, and Fox was the one with egg on its face. Colby tried to compensate by alluding the points her guests refused to make.
“I think it’s interesting that Bess is Jewish, saying a man should come who wants to wipe Israel off the map,” Colby observed. Also, “I have to wonder how much this has to do with publicity, since we’ve been talking about it for a few days.”
Find all of Fox’s segments on Ahmadinemania here.
Meanwhile, we really really want to ignore this guy, and we’re not huge fans of Columbia administration either, but when you say that they’re “like serial child abusers who are constantly molesting the student population with, this time, a publicity stunt,” we kind of sit and twitch for a while.
– LBD
Loading …
46 Comments
@I don't understand what the whole bruhaha is about. Ahmadinejad can’t blow his own nose without permission from the mullahs that actually run Iran. He just has a bit more flair than most puppets.
@is there any video of this?
@seriously, nice coverage Lydia!
@we have company CU isn’t the only non-UN place to host Ahmadinejad…
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-21-2007/0004667560&EDATE=
@we're famous Columbia finally has a headline on drudge!!!!
It’s “COLUMBIA DEAN: SURE WE’D INVITE HITLER TO SPEAK”
and links to the youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxmEGsOkEVc
wohoooo
@#33 again In fact: http://www.columbiaspectator.com/?q=node/26818
“How many people in the western hemisphere, or the world for that matter, will get a chance to protest him [Ahmadinejad]?” said Chris Kulawik, CC ’08 and president of the College Republicans who signed the statement. He later added, “I think he’s one of the most dangerous people in the world today.”
So STFU, do your own research, and lay off Bwog and Spec’s back on this one.
@Show me where Spec said Kulawik wasn’t signing on.
@Do you really need to give that subhuman piece of trash a legitimate platform from which to spill his vile insanity in order to understand his views? Are his regular network broadcasts not enough? Why do you wish to legitimize his views at a World Leaders Forum, of all places? He is no leader; he is a hate-filled warlord who would love nothing more than to publicly behead you for the sin of being a westerner. By your logic, if it can be called that, Osama too should be invited for a speech on our campus — for how can we believe the translations and rephrasings of his audio tapes to be his true beliefs? How can we believe that he orchestrated attacks on our nation if he can’t even show us the the airplane ticket stubs?
Your idiocy sickens me.
@almamater Kulawik brought Gilchrist here because he believed, and still presumably believes, that Gilchrist is an appropriate embodiment of conservative Republican values. It is dishonest for him to cite that event as an expression of his belief in discourse and debate. If he wanted a debate with political opponents, he could have invited MoveOn.org instead.
@chris's bit I was so pleased to see that Kulawik pointed out that the comparisons between Hitler and Ahmadinejad were ill founded, because of the different times and situations. Not what Fox were hoping for, I’m sure.
@awesome david judd compares ahmadinejad to gilchrist http://blog.cupolitics.org/node/292#comments
and then says this isn’t the same free speech issue as with gilchrist because it may open up a dialogue in the wake of rumors the US might strike iran
never mind press documented cases of ahmadinejad’s royal guard blowing up innocent iraqi’s to create instability or other murderous things he’s done.
take note bwog cause i know you equate the kulawiks and judds of the world together.
Kulawik despite obvious hatred towards the guy used the same priniciple he supported in bringing gilchrist to support bringing ahmadinejad here (and you assumed the opposite for some reason) whereas Judd has now made an extraordinarily circumlocutious argument which hinges upon the possiblity of the opening of a national dialogue from a Columbia Event which may help to squelch a war which is based upon rumors of a strike he’s dug up.
@according to bwog, fox news told them that kulawik would be arguing against.
@NEWS Something Not Related to The Mahmoud-athon
Columbia Wins Baker Blast! http://www.gocolumbialions.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=9600&ATCLID=1246571
I wonder how many people showed up for the Blast?
@EAL Roar Lions! Columbia beats Marist 31-7! I was there in all my rainy glory! Now let’s hope the Lions do well against the dreaded Princeton Tigers next week. And a decent-sized crowd showed up too.
Why no mention of the game, Bwog? Or are you part of the cynical campus conspiracy out to squelch any flourishing of the flame of school spirit?
@almamater The invitation of any high-ranking administration official would suffice.
@The Hitler argument I am so sick of this argument. Yeah, you know what? If Hitler were alive today, I think that not only would Columbia invite him to their World Leader’s Forum (his being a pretty powerful world leader and all), a lot of people would want to go see him, if not to engage him into debate, at the very least to see history being made. I would too.
This is going to be just like that; this is going to be good, and anyone who doesn’t want to hear what he has to say on ideological grounds is missing a real opportunity.
But that’s their problem.
@you're too stupid to understand the post.
I posted that snipped w/the deans quote from a right wing blog to demonstrate how stupid it is to equate the two. Hitler has already been known to have committed one of the most vast and hideous genocides in the history of man. If he was invited to Columbia to speak, I would hope somebody would have the good sense to bring take him out.
Ahmadinejad, while vile, still isn’t up to that level of evil.
Anything Hitler would say would necessarily fall under figthing words whereas Ahmadinejad might just parrot philosophical (and reprehensible) talking points. By your logic, you would invite Osama Bin Laden for a speech here.
@so... How many people think the secret service has been reading BWOG for the past week? Cause I know they have.
Hey pal! How’s it goin? Saved The Decider from any more assassination by pretzel attempts recently?
@No, because He’s not smart enough for us.
;)
@our dean University Dean John Coatsworth, aging relic and bastion of liberal idiocy appeared on Fox News to defend the invite of a man who is supporting and participating in killing American servicemen and women.
“If Hitler were in the United States and he wanted a platform from which to speak he would have plenty of platforms to speak from in the United States. If he were willing to engage in a debate and a discussion, to be challenged by Columbia students and faculty, we would certainly invite him.”
@almamater Well, we’ll wait and see. If it does, then this charade will command a modicum of respectability.
@the charade is thinking that Bush’s handlers would let him anywhere near an audience able to ask him questions that haven’t been pre-screened by his advisors.
@almamater Don’t think for a second that Ahmadinejad has been invited here merely to offer an opposing view, in the spirit of free debate. Do you think the University would ever deign to invite President Bush to participate in the World Leaders Forum?
@um.... yeah, I think it would, actually
@almamater The comment above is in response to #4.
@almamater Yes indeed, the statement that you quote is poorly worded, and, perhaps, not entirely thought out. But the sentiment behind it is nevertheless quite valid. Many people on campus sympathize with Ahmadinejad because he is an “outspoken” enemy of their primary fiend, George W. Bush. They are willing to overlook the fact that he is also rabidly homophobic. Just as they are willing to overlook the fact that the Iranian revolutionary regime brutally suppresses free speech, curtails the press, and tortures labor leaders. He is not being invited to speak here because his views on these issues conflict with the majoritarian views on campus, but, rather, because his anti-American and anti-Israeli views command a large following amongst the faculty and student body.
@i was #4 bullshit. every single person i’ve talked on campus thinks that ahmadinejad sucks—from my dorm floor alone, that includes an iranian girl, an israeli girl, and gay me. all of them want him to speak, and all of them stand against his views.
and most of the students are probably not overlooking the guy’s views on gays, women, etc., considering the graphic signs that were posted all over butler/campus.
but i won’t just use generalizations; maybe everyone i’ve talked to happens to be part of a minority. still, bollinger seems to have invited him as a negative example, not as someone we should emulate: “this will bring us into contact with beliefs many, most or even all of us will find offensive and even odious.”
@almamater Despite the fact that Bollinger intends to sharply question Mr. Ahmadinejad, the truth is that Ahmadinejad was not invited here to serve as a “negative example.” He was invited here as an expression of the University’s willingness to engage individuals of his ilk in dialogue. My point is that the University does not invite individuals who generate comparable ire amongst the anti-American elements of the faculty. Unfortunately, the University’s “openness” is always most poignantly expressed and vehemently invoked when the world’s rogues arrive at the Waldorf Astoria for their occassional colloquoy on the banks of the East River.
There is no question that Ahmadinejad has sympathizers on this campus. And there is no doubt in my mind that his invitation to speak here has much to do with that unfortunate reality. Of course, as you’ve described, some people wish to attend the event so that they can challenge the Iranian leader, including, presumably, President Bollinger. I applaud their belief in such free discourse. Personally, however, I don’t think that people with any sense need to hear a refutation of such odious views.
@Empirical Evidence? “There is no question that Ahmadinejad has sympathizers on this campus. And there is no doubt in my mind that his invitation to speak here has much to do with that unfortunate reality.”
For someone without any doubts, do you have any proof of this? Quotes from such “sympathizers?” Statistics that sympathizers constitute a significant part of the student/faculty population? Anything that might suggest the causality of those sympathetic sentiments? Can you even define “sympathizer?” Are you talking about people who oppose military strikes against Iran? Or people who actually support his foreign and/or domestic policies?
Or did you simply leave those things out so your comments could sound matter-of-factly short and sweet? Because really, Bwog readers would love to hear more about your speculation.
@almamater You need only take a close look at some of the comments posted on Bwog these past few days, or watch Alejandra Aponte’s interview on Fox News for the empirical evidence that you seek.
@i'd say there is a lunatic fringe who might think he’s just awesome for his hatred for the west. but i don’t think there is a single person on this campus who actually agrees with his policy on gays, women, etc. any admiration for ahmadinejad requires overlooking everything other than his bush-hatred.
@DHI That was an amazing screensaver/video game.
@bob f Is Columbia University President Bollinger also going to apologize to the Iranian people for Columbia’s awarding of an honorary degree to the Shah of Iran after the CIA’s 1953 coup in Iran? See http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1020/60/ for more info about U.S. role in Iranian history.
@... Uhhh… no?
@not only fox spec and bwog were both wrong in assuming kulawik was going to be opposed..as were a bunch of spec commentators who labeled him a hypocrite
Then again who cares about the truth
@almamater Yes, if they had done a modicum of research, they would’ve realized that he signed a petition endorsing the visit as an unmatched “learning opportunity in world affairs” just a few days ago.
@um, spec and bwog got the info from fox, and people were calling him a hypocrite because they knew he had signed that statement…do your own research first.
@i'm sorry but you’re a retard if you think my comment is to blame. When so called reporters try to give information about something they are responsible for the research. Now spec and bwog obviously didn’t go to the source in kulawik either because they were 1-too lazy, 2-are obvious liberal schills or 3-don’t understand what reporting is.
If you’re reporting an item and can contact both of the first person sources themselves don’t be surprised when people call you on your bullshit because in your ineptitude you chose to run information as a fact based upon second hand accounts.
Maybe they should do their research instead of having you all over their balls, they are the ‘reporters’.
@sanchez' resume he’s an escort. that’s all he needs.
@Sanchez is wack Matt Sanchez makes me sick. Bill O’Reilly declined an ivitation to speak at Columbia last year, he was nervous about vertigo outside the no-spin zone.
Does Sanchez ever stop to think that perhaps the most important thing on his resume is a degree from Columbia University?
In reference to four, Ahmadinejad holds public hangings and is adamently against homosexual rights, looks like we managed to trump that…
@alma mater Where can you not find a left wing nut on campus?
@lol I love how incoherent Fox News’ argument is.
Evidence for Columbia’s narrow-minded liberalism: “Would Columbia allow someone who opposed homosexual rights to speak there? Of course not!”
@... Ironic since Mahmoud opposes “homosexual rights”?
@also “I think it’s interesting that Bess is Jewish, saying a man should come who wants to wipe Israel off the map”
trotting out the implied self-hating jew arguement? truly pathetic attempt at discrediting.
what a truly $hitty network.
@I'd love a link to the Jamie Colby video, instead of just to a page about her on Fox.
Is there one? I’ve looked everywhere. Please?
@flabbergasted “I have to wonder how much this has to do with publicity, since we’ve been talking about it for a few days.”
Well gee, it’s not like Columbia made you talk about it and air multiple segments?