Iranian University Chancellors Ask Bollinger 10 Questions

Dandelion Salad

Global Research, September 25, 2007
Fars News Agency

Seven chancellors and presidents of Iranian universities and research centers, in a letter addressed to their counterpart in the US, Colombia University, denounced Lee Bollinger’s insulting words against the Iranian nation and president and invited him to provide responses to 10 questions by Iranian academics and intellectuals.

The following is the full text of the letter:

Mr. Lee Bollinger
Columbia University President

We, the professors and heads of universities and research institutions in Tehran, hereby announce our displeasure and protest at your impolite remarks prior to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s recent speech at Columbia University.

We would like to inform you that President Ahmadinejad was elected directly by the Iranian people through an enthusiastic two-round poll in which almost all of the country’s political parties and groups participated. To assess the quality and nature of these elections you may refer to US news reports on the poll dated June 2005.

Your insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with a population of 72 million and a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful.

Your comments, filled with hate and disgust, may well have been influenced by extreme pressure from the media, but it is regrettable that media policy-makers can determine the stance a university president adopts in his speech.

Your remarks about our country included unsubstantiated accusations that were the product of guesswork as well as media propaganda. Some of your claims result from misunderstandings that can be clarified through dialogue and further research.

During his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad answered a number of your questions and those of students. We are prepared to answer any remaining questions in a scientific, open and direct debate.

You asked the president approximately ten questions. Allow us to ask you ten of our own questions in the hope that your response will help clear the atmosphere of misunderstanding and distrust between our two countries and reveal the truth.

1- Why did the US media put you under so much pressure to prevent Mr. Ahmadinejad from delivering his speech at Columbia University? And why have American TV networks been broadcasting hours of news reports insulting our president while refusing to allow him the opportunity to respond? Is this not against the principle of freedom of speech?

2- Why, in 1953, did the US administration overthrow Iran’s national government under Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh and go on to support the Shah’s dictatorship?

3- Why did the US support the blood-thirsty dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, considering his reckless use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers defending their land and even against his own people?

4- Why is the US putting pressure on the government elected by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza instead of officially recognizing it? And why does it oppose Iran’s proposal to resolve the 60-year-old Palestinian issue through a general referendum?

5- Why has the US military failed to find Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden even with all its advanced equipment? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bush and Bin Laden families and their cooperation on oil deals? How can you justify the Bush administration’s efforts to disrupt investigations concerning the September 11 attacks?

6- Why does the US administration support the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) despite the fact that the group has officially and openly accepted the responsibility for numerous deadly bombings and massacres in Iran and Iraq? Why does the US refuse to allow Iran’s current government to act against the MKO’s main base in Iraq?

7- Was the US invasion of Iraq based on international consensus and did international institutions support it? What was the real purpose behind the invasion which has claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Where are the weapons of mass destruction that the US claimed were being stockpiled in Iraq?

8- Why do America’s closest allies in the Middle East come from extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist monarchical regimes?

9- Why did the US oppose the plan for a Middle East free of unconventional weapons in the recent session of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors despite the fact the move won the support of all members other than Israel?

10- Why is the US displeased with Iran’s agreement with the IAEA and why does it openly oppose any progress in talks between Iran and the agency to resolve the nuclear issue under international law?

Finally, we would like to express our readiness to invite you and other scientific delegations to our country. A trip to Iran would allow you and your colleagues to speak directly with Iranians from all walks of life including intellectuals and university scholars. You could then assess the realities of Iranian society without media censorship before making judgments about the Iranian nation and government.

You can be assured that Iranians are very polite and hospitable toward their guests.



Columbia President Bollinger Introduces Ahmadinejad (video)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks at Columbia University (video link)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks at the UN (videos)

Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1 By Juan Cole

Ahmadinejad Was Great at Columbia, and Bollinger Bashed Him by William Mac (video) contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries:
© Copyright , Fars News Agency, 2007
The url address of this article is:

3 thoughts on “Iranian University Chancellors Ask Bollinger 10 Questions

  1. Agree, why insult your guess, in the Introduction, very dis-tastefully done.
    Yes Introduction first, then Questions, then follow up remarks towards answers, and allow follow up to those. It is courtsey, not taught in school, apparently.
    The President of Iran, made enough comments for people to consider the source. “No-Gays”, Ok, i don’t know, but laughter, great Hospitality. ya all come back and see us again, ya hear.
    Get off the high horse, and down to business.

  2. Insulting an invited guest is not shows typical American bash and bully atitude…absolutely a diplomtic faux and in sheer bad taste…
    But I like your article for its unbiased and lucid approach ….

    Tears on the Soul of Assam and Photography
  3. Whilst I find the questions important and probing it does not come as a surprise to me that in very typical fashion, once again, these esteemed persons are clearly out of the scope of what would make a tremendous debate. I would like to make some suggestions:

    I do feel for these scholars insofar as nothing can justify the verbal attack rendered by Mr. Bollinger, president of Columbia University. I do not ascribe to the notion that he or anyone else can embarrass me; rather, one can only embarrass one’s self. I am however quite sickened by his introduction to a head-of-state regardless of who they are or from where they come. I will offer no excuse.

    When all of the rhetoric between the nations’ comes forth, I find very little of what is to be construed as an open forum environment that would be conducive to anything remotely constructive. I suggest that if the scholars are serious about their desires then issue a challenge.

    For this to happen there is the dire need for a pre-appointed neutral site. Moreover, a panel of justices or moderators for open discourse would be needed. Why? Simply because in the nature of language the Arabic dialects are construed as passionate by Westerners; furthermore, the aforementioned facilitators would simply have to blow a horn, sound whistles, and unplug microphones to get the parties from screaming at each other.

    Most importantly however is the need to keep within the scope of the debate. Far be it from me, but the questions posed to Mr. Bollinger are simply all over the place. It is fundamental to debating; moreover, to
    “…help clear the atmosphere of misunderstanding and distrust between our two countries and reveal the truth” as the scholars suggest is to focus on matters say, within the last fifty years.

    And finally I do believe that this is a good idea inasmuch as academics do have a way of seeing the truth; therefore, I am encouraging the scholars from Iran to bring all of the supporting documentation, preferably authenticated before use, same with the other side.

    Thank you.

Comments are closed.