The Online Reflector

By Andrew Gouty
Online Editor

America has become a little security-paranoid, and with good reason. Within the last decade, the United States has endured, arguably, the worst terrorist attack in its history and been dragged into two Middle Eastern conflicts in the aftermath. Such attacks have led to the labeling and profiling of certain people while in mass transit.

Whenever I travel, I always shave first. Those males who have had the pleasure (or misfortune) of flying in the last six years may have noticed the correlation between the number of hairs on the face and the number of questions security guards ask at the terminal.

For females, some totally different traits tend to throw up the red flag. The last time I took my 93-year-old grandmother through security, there was a lengthy discussion ensued about the security risk of her walker. It couldn’t fit through the x-ray machine.

On my latest traveling excursion, I failed to shave appropriately and my laptop came into question. Two bag searches and 20 questions later, I decided that I either needed to look less like a “terrorist” (it seems that I have to shave to accomplish this) or tell better jokes to the security staff at the airport. However, my last routine didn’t get me too many laughs—the threat of a terrorist equals no laughing matter.

Enter a few million pointing fingers, which all tend to precede the term “terrorist.” The label carries a bit of weight and can generally land you in Guantanamo Bay faster than you can say “guaranteed rights.”

The latest hand (with finger extended) came from Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, who hosted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for a debate on Sept. 22. Before the Iranian president was able to say a word, Bollinger threw the label of a “petty and cruel dictator.” He continued with a short list of founded and unfounded accusations, including support of terrorist organizations, Holocaust denial and general humanitarian failures in Iran.

It may be a stretch to say that Bollinger and Columbia University filled the role of host. Even if Ahmadinejad is a despicable tyrant whose government sponsors terrorism and the extinction of the Israeli state, he was invited to an event; he was a guest. Bollinger made a point of calling the Iranian president “either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated,” referring only to Ahmadinejad’s acceptance of the invitation to attend the event.

Since we Americans are generally poor at understanding situations that do not apply directly to us, let us all imagine George W. Bush heading to France on a diplomatic mission. He stops by a university in Paris, where his host calls him a tyrant and warmonger in front of thousands. Miffed? I would be, and Bush would not be among my all-star picks of American presidents.

Like it or not, Bush represents us, just as Ahmadinejad represents the Iranians. These leaders represent government and policy, but they also put a public face to our societies at large. The Iranian culture is likely upset with ours now more than ever, after we invited their leader to coffee and cake, only to pour the equivalent of toothpaste into his mug. Drink up.

In many cases, Ahmadinejad represents a despicable regime. However the bait and switch tactics by which he was invited and then greeted by Columbia University are unacceptable. As ignorant as either side of the political fence may be, productive dialogue across it does not begin with name-calling. However, I would like to add one label to those Bollinger threw from his soapbox: human being.

Bollinger was correct. He is a professor – and we all know how professors can grandstand when we give them the opportunity. Is he a mouthpiece for thousands of other concerned citizens? That could be. But before I hand him a microphone, I want him to sit next to the person, and make sure that the guest has his or her drink of choice and a piece of cake. For a practice round, I understand that Nicolas Sarkozy enjoys sweetened black tea.

Good luck, Lee.