[Don Corleone]

The LEFT! On the wrong side of everything American since the Civil War.

[Rocko]

Bump.

[the Real fifi]

Link doesn’t work

[roses of sharon]

Bush Derangement Syndrome is dangerous to this country.

What will the left do next?

Strap on suicide belts?

[HardStarboard]

It would be absolutely appropriate, at the very least, if some upstanding, brave Jewish student would "pie" Ahmadinejad during his visit to the Campus!

The picture would have a salutary effect when circulated in the Middle East..."powerless greasy Iranian punk pied in America"!

[Eagle74]

Every Iranian in the US with Diplomatic Immunity, should be arrested and sent to Gitmo for 444 days.

[r9etb]

In the 1930s, the Columbia administration participated in what could be described as the coddling of the Nazi regime. In 1933, Nazi ambassador Hans Luther gave a speech on campus in which, according to a 2006 article in Spectator by Rafeal Medoff, he focused on Hitler’s “peaceful intentions” in Europe. Columbia maintained student exchange programs with Nazi universities throughout the ’30s, while, in 1936, our university sent a representative to the 550th anniversary celebration of the University of Heidelberg, even though, writes Medoff, it had “already had been purged of Jewish faculty members, instituted a Nazi curriculum, and hosted a burning of books by Jewish authors.”

This is a rather interesting example of historical revisionism. Mr. Rosen is essentially judging Columbia's actions in the '30s by a standard that they should have the same knowledge of future atrocities the Nazis would commit, that he (Mr. Rosen) has gained through benefit of hindsight.

American (and Western) intellectuals -- including those at Columbia -- do have a lot to answer for, in regard to Hitler's rise to power.

But Mr. Rosen's accusations are preposterous. It is not valid to judge Columbia on the fact that ambassador Hans Luther spoke their in 1933, on the basis of what Germany was to do 10 years later -- knowledge that Rosen has, but that Columbia University did not.

That's not to say he's entirely wrong: looking in hindsight to the methods and actions of the tyrannies of the 20th Century gives us plenty of cause to classify Ahneedajihad as a positive danger to the world.

But history has to be understood in context, which Mr. Rosen's article neglects to provide.