.
-
========================
SEE UPDATES AT END
========================
Summary:
On Thursday, September 7, 2006, the University of Virginia hosted a speech by former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami in the celebrated Dome Room of the Rotunda.
At the time, Mr. Khatami was on a speaking tour of America, during which he made very derogatory statements as to our war on jihadist terror, and our foreign policy intentions, while all but excusing (if not giving moral sanction to) the jihadists who instigated our battle against them.
Despite the stated policy of U.Va. concerning such events --- that they are "free and open to the public" --- in this case, the U.Va. group that sponsored the speech (the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture):
Refused to publicly acknowledge that the speech was even taking place (which is particularly notable as it was coming on the cusp of the fifth anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, and which was perpetrated exclusively by Islamic militants)
.
Stated that the very taxpayers who were forced to financially support this event (via their tax dollars) would not be allowed to attend or ask questions of Mr. Khatami; instead, only a pre-selected, hand-picked group of professors, faculty, students and "friends" of the University would be admitted
.
Demonstrated unmistakable bias in the way it publicizes speakers
Efforts soon began by concerned U.Va. alumni, citizens of Virginia and others to organize a peaceful demonstration to protest this outrageous abuse of power.
(Sept. 6) VICTORY!!!!
As the result of several factors, primarily a press release and accompanying graphical presentation (both available via email request) validating the above contentions, U.Va. and the IASC:
(a) Publicly acknowledged that the speech was taking place
.
(b) Stated that they would allow up to 450 students and citizens to watch Khatami's speech live, in an on-campus theater
Although no questions other than those that were"pre-approved" from the hand-picked Dome Room audience were accepted, at least the hermetically-sealed bubble that the IASC hoped to provide for Khatami, in which to deliver his speech, got a LOT bigger.
This is a pretty interesting story, as it demonstrates (a) what can happen when taxpayer-funded professors forget who they really work for, as well as their basic obligations to play by the rules, and provide fairness, accountability and balance, and (b) what can happen when taxpayers and students combat the mindsets described in (a).
To fully appreciate the significance of this controversy --- and why U.Va. is about the last place in the world in which Khatami's speech should have been allowed to take place, under these circumstances --- requires context and analysis, which is provided below. Please also pay special attention to the last two items, to learn how you can help to correct this abuse of power.
Contents of this blogthread: - About Thomas Jefferson, the University of Virginia, the Rotunda and the Dome Room
. - U.Va.’s policy concerning public attendance at lectures
. - About Mohammed Khatami, and his statements, particularly regarding America, Iran, Hezbollah and "peace"
. - Friday, Sept. 1: An inadvertent discovery of Khatami’s Sept. 7 speech at U.Va.
. - Saturday, Sept. 2: A search of U.Va. websites reveals NOTHING about Khatami’s speech
. - Monday, Sept. 4: U.Va.’s resistance to inquiries about Khatami’s speech - and my reaction
. - Monday, Sept. 4: My development and distribution of a graphical presentation and key media materials
. - Tuesday, Sept. 5: Media contacts; new allies are discovered; a terrific student editorial
. - Wednesday, Sept 6: U.VA. SURRENDERS, publicly announcing that it will permit limited citizen & student attendance at Khatami speech
. - Thursday, Sept 7, Part I: The morning of the Khatami speech; the near-complete dhimmification of the local media; allies rush into action
. - Thursday, Sept. 7, Part II: THE KHATAMI SPEECH - FULL COVERAGE
. - Khatami vs. Ronald Reagan - A study in contrasting styles and decorum; Harvard’s bold decision re the Khatami speech
. - WRAP-UP: Lessons to be learned in the continuing battle over balance & openness in taxpayer-funded universities
. - A CALL TO ARMS: YOU can help compel U.Va. to bring in a speaker representing the other side of the issues that Khatami addressed
-----------------------------------------------------------
1) About Thomas Jefferson, the University of Virginia, the Rotunda and the Dome Room
-----------------------------------------
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."
Thomas Jefferson
Bill for Religious Freedom, 1779 (2:545)
Of all his amazing accomplishments, Thomas Jefferson instructed his survivors to inscribe his gravestone with only the 
three accomplishments that he felt were his most significant:
Author of the Declaration of American Independence
.
Author of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom
.
Father of the University of Virginia
While his first two acheivements and their outgrowth dominated the majority of his life, it was the last --- his desire to design and create the first American institution of higher learning that would be free of religious indoctrination and "old-world" thinking --- that consumed Mr. Jefferson's later years.
And since its inception, Mr. Jefferson's University of Virginia, located in his beloved hometown of Charlottesville, VA, is considered one of the premier schools of the world, and architecturally, among the most beautiful.
The world-famous Rotunda that Mr. Jefferson designed, and his architectural blueprint for it
The centerpiece of the "academical village" that Mr. Jefferson designed is the Rotunda, situated at the top of "The Lawn," the open-air cluster of pavillions and dormitories housing distinguished professors and students. In Mr. Jefferson's time --- and to this day --- professors and students meet on the beautiful lawn, and even in the main floors of the professors' pavillions, to conduct classes, hear lectures, and discuss ideas.
A woodcut of "The Lawn" from 1826, the year Mr. Jefferson's "academical village" opened, and an aerial photograph demonstrating how it's grown through the years
The crown jewel of the Rotunda is the Dome Room, which is considered among the most beautiful rooms in the world. The American Institute of Architects called it "the proudest achievement of American architecture in the past 200 years" (AIA Journal, July 1976, p. 91). Situated on the top floor of the Rotunda, and bathed in light courtesy of a large oculus in the ceiling, the Dome Room (originally designed as a library) is now used for special events, dinners and public lectures by notable figures from throughout the world. With a maximum seating capacity of less than 150, the Dome room is best suited for very intimate gatherings.
The breathtaking "Dome Room" in the Rotunda
Past speakers have included U.S. presidents, leaders of other nations, dignitaries, scholars, artists, authors and others. It is assumed that Mr. Jefferson had his Rotunda and Dome Room in mind when he said:
"This institution will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind. For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it."
(Jefferson and His Time: The Sage of Monticello, p. 417-418)
Those fortunate enough to live in central Virginia also enjoy the opportunity to visit the Rotunda and the Dome Room at their leisure, 7 days a week, at no charge, via informative guided tours, or to freely wander the building. Some go to be inspired in the aura of liberty that this hallowed temple of liberty exudes. Others go to quietly reflect on troublesome world events. Still others go to be reminded, through the many educational exhibits contained in the Rotunda, of the living impact that Jefferson and America's Founders had on world history, and of their courage in creating the world's first free nation.
Many admirers of Mr. Jefferson consider his University of Virginia, and the Rotunda and the Dome Room in particular, to be living, architectural expressions of --- and testaments to --- two of his most famous guiding principles:
"All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God."
Letter to Roger C. Weightman, June 24, 1826 (ten days before Mr. Jefferson died, on July 4 - the fiftieth anniversary of the ratification of his Declaration of American Independence)
"I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."
Inscription on the Jefferson Memorial, Washington, DC
-----------------------------------------------------------
2) U.Va.'s policy concerning public attendance at lectures
----------------------------------------
One key benefit of living in central Virginia is the ordinary citizen's ability to attend free lectures by notable figures from all walks of life that are hosted, promoted and sponsored by U.Va. and its affiliated entities, such as the heralded Miller Center for Public Affairs. Authors, political leaders, artists, intellectuals, journalists, TV personalities and innumerable others appear in open, public forums, and respond to questions from students, citizens and others, in a free and stimulating atmosphere. One prime example is the U.Va. Center for Politics' September 13 lecture by former Vice-Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro; as noted in the publicity page, the event is "free and open to the public."
Left: Half-page ad in the Cavailer Daily newspaper, and event notice on the Center For Politics website
Like other U.Va. groups, the one that sponsored Khatami's visit, the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, posts this principle at the very top of its "Calendar" page.
Yet in the case of Mohammed Khatami, no public notice of any kind was issued in advance of the event --- let alone an invitation to the U.Va. students or the general public --- until it was forced to, and it only did so begrudgingly, on a very limited basis, barely 24 hours before the event was to take place.
-----------------------------------------------------------
3) About Mohammed Khatami, and his statements regarding America, Iran, Hezbollah and "peace"
----------------------------------------
Mohammed Khatami was elected to two terms as the president of Iran (1997 & 2001) under a pledge of “reforming” its strict Islamic laws that were (and still are) enforced by the radical clerics who actually run the nation, and who prevented most of the reforms that Khatami pushed for from being enacted.
There is substantial debate as to how hard he fought for his reforms, and how much he used his prominence to capitulate to --- if not openly encourage, arm and enable --- the vilest jihadist butchers (or as he calls them, "resistance fighters") that he now speaks of, in his "retirement."
Regardless, much is known about what transpired during Khatami's reign:
- Iran continued its role as one of the primary state sponsors of jihadist terrorist organizations throughout the world
. - Iran sent extensive arms and financial support to Hezbollah, which unleashed the former on Israel in mid-July, and is now using the latter to continue buying support from poor Lebanese
. - Iran continued its efforts to develop nuclear weapons, both independently, and in conjunction with other repressive regimes, including North Korea
. - Iran supplied arms and advanced IEDs to al Quada and insurgents in Iraq, which were used to kill and injure U.S. and coalition soldiers, as well as Iraqi civilians
. - Iran stoked religious and ethnic tensions in Iraq, in an attempt to further destabilize the flowering democracy that the U.S. spent blood and treasure to bring about
. - Iran systematically repressed, tortured and murdered internal dissidents and students who questioned or opposed its domestic and foreign policies, and strict Islamic doctrines
Since leaving the presidency in 2005, Khatami has become affiliated with several organizations that claim to foster better relations between Islam and the West, most notably the UN's "Alliance of Civilizations," and Iran's "Institute for Dialogue among Civilizations and Cultures."
It is acknowledged that Khatami speaks of peace and understanding. But Khatami is also an extremely articulate apologist for jihadist butchery (even going so far as to give moral sanction to many of their acts of barbarity), and for Iran's unrelenting quest for nuclear weaponry. He is also a vitriolic in his criticism of American foreign policy. And for these reasons, many view him as an especially dangerous force in the conflict between the West and militant Islam.
Consider the following Khatami quotes about America, and Hezbollah:
"America is the root of worldwide terror...(I)t's difficult to distinguish between President Bush and Osama bin Laden... (W)e love Hezbollah."
(July 14, 2005 on Al-Arabiyya TV; Source: MEMRI)
.
“As America claims to be fighting terrorism it implements policies which lead to the intensification of terrorism… and institutionalized violence... (A)merican policies... exploit the grandeur of the nation and country of the United States for the subjugation and domination of the world."
(Chicago, September 2, 2006; Source: BBC)
.
"(Hezbollah is like) a shining sun that illuminates and warms the hearts of all Muslims and supporters of freedom in the world; (Israel's) shocking atrocities are a sign of its violent nature..."
(July 18, 2006 --- six days after Hezbollah instigated its latest war against Israel, and was raining down rockets on civilians; Source: New York Times/International Herald-Tribune)
Now, consider these quotes from Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, whom Khatami speaks of with such loving reverence:
"This American administration is an enemy. Our motto, which we are not afraid to repeat year after year, is: 'Death to America!!!'."
(February 18, 2005; Source: MEMRI)
“If they (the Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them world wide.”
(October 22, 2002 interview with Nasrallah in Lebanon's Daily Star; Source: National Review Online)
"There is no solution to the conflict in this region except with the disappearance of Israel... (P)eace settlements will not change reality, which is that Israel is the enemy and that it will never be a neighbor or a nation... (I) promise Israel that it will see more suicide attacks, for we will write our history with blood."
(Nasrallah address to Hezbollah rally in Beirut, December 31, 1999; Source: Wikipedia, University of New Bruswick, Associated Press)
"The most honorable death is death by killing, and the most honorable killing and the most glorious martyrdom is when a man is killed for the sake of Allah, by the enemies of Allah, the murderers of the prophets (i.e. the Jews)."
(February 18, 2005; Source: MEMRI)
"We have discovered how to hit the Jews where they are the most vulnerable. The Jews love life, so that is what we shall take away from them. We are going to win, because they love life and we love death."
(Spring 2004 interview; Source: National Review Online)
"A nation with child-martyrs will be victorious, no matter what difficulties lie in its path. Israel cannot conquer us or violate our territories, because we have martyr sons who will purge the land of the Zionist filth... (T)his will be done through the blood of the martyrs, until we eventually achieve our goals."
(On the nearly 2,000 children aged 10-15 who have been recruited and indoctrinated to become suicide-bombers, as quoted in Egypt's Roz Al-Yusuf; Source: MEMRI; also, for a much more detailed profile of the indoctrination of child "martyrs," click here)
"If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli."
(Hizbullah: Politics and Religion, London: Pluto Press; 2001; ISBN 0745317936)
ALSO --- NEWS ITEMS OF RELEVANCE:
Iran's collaboration with Al Quada, Hezbollah, North Korea and Iraq during Khatami's reign - from a top Iranian Revolutionary Guard defector (Source: MEMRI)
Former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami, in his first public appearance in the United States, spoke about "the need to create a dialogue" between the secular and religious worlds... (but) Khatami did not take questions from reporters... (Sept 2, 2006; Source: AFP) Many more quotes from Khatami, Nasrallah and other jihadist butchers and their enablers & appeasers are available at MEMRI, JihadWatch, DanielPipes, CAMERA, and other websites.
ALSO, a highly detailed analysis of the relationship between Iran and Hezbollah can be found at the Israeli Intelligence & Terrorism Information Center website, Terrorism-Info.org.
Given all the above, how can the mainstream media and intellectuals consider Khatami to be a "moderate," knowing (as they should) that he enables, condones and/or excuses away the most grievous acts of barbarism, depravity and destruction? And knowing (as they should) that Khatami's regime armed Hezbollah to the teeth, and sanctioned its actions, how can the MSM and intellectuals not ask:
What kind of moral presence could Khatami possibly provide to address, and ultimately help to eradicate jihadist terror?
What kind of mindset and value system would permit --- let alone invite --- a man such as Khatami to speak at a major U.S. university, especially one such as U.Va., which was sired by one of history's most pivotal advocates of liberty? (And in an ultimate insult, to support dipping into taxpayer funds to facilitate it?!)
Apparently, these questions are too inflammatory for the MSM and modern intellectuals to even consider.
-----------------------------------------------------------
4) Friday, Sept. 1: An inadvertent & troubling disclosure in the news media
---------------------------------------
On Friday, September 1, the start of the Labor Day weekend, a very brief article appeared in Charlottesville's only daily paper, the Daily Progress, with the headline "Allen objects to giving visa to former Iran president," and the subhead "Khatami scheduled to speak at U.Va. on Thursday."
The headline referred to Senator George Allen's (R-VA) August 31 letter to Condi Rice, protesting on numerous substantive grounds the State Department's issuance of an unrestricted travel visa to Khatami, and particularly, of his apparent plans to speak at U.Va. (it's unclear as to how Allen's office learned of this intent):(Excerpt) "While I appreciate that we are an open society that is tolerant of diverse viewpoints, I question the benefit of permitting a person who headed a regime that is a leading sponsor of terrorism, permitted human rights abuses, including repression of women and religious minorities, and presided over Iran’s secret nuclear program, which is now the focus of possible UN action, to travel without restriction in the United States. The actions of the Iranian government under President Khatami include the expenditure of billions of dollars on nuclear reactors and sophisticated weapons and the failure to implement reforms that are necessary for Iran to abide by its treaty obligations. Granting this travel visa gives support to the current Iranian strategy of stalling action while it builds its nuclear capabilities and dividing the tentative coalition of states opposing Iran’s nuclear weapons program."
The Daily Progress article also had a key revelation:
"Mohammad Khatami, who served as president of Iran from 1997 until 2005, is due to speak at the University of Virginia at an invitation-only event in the Rotunda Dome Room."
I and several others I spoke to found this to be stunning - first, that Khatami was being given carte blanche by our State Department to travel the USA, and second, that he was apparently being sponsored by U.Va. to give his America-bashing, jihadist-appeasing, liberty-deriding diatribe on its hallowed grounds, to an "invitation-only" audience in the Dome Room.
But I also found the tone of the U.Va. professors quoted in the article to be particularly disturbing:
R.K. Ramazani, an Iranian expert and veteran government professor at U.Va., said Allen’s objections "perhaps should be expected. I am not surprised, but I think [U.S. and Iranian leaders] need to talk. We have people, including Jimmy Carter, who believe you talk to your enemies and then you have people who say you don’t talk to them, you exclude them, and that has hurt us for a long, long time,” Ramazani said. “They have diehards and we have our own diehards.”
“George Allen has found someone he does not want to welcome to America,” said Larry Sabato, Director - U.Va. Center for Politics. “Iran is one of the American public’s least-liked nations, and so Allen can’t lose political ground on this one. It also helps Allen to change the subject from his enormous ‘macaca’ gaffe" in which he “welcomed” Virginia native and UVa student S.R. Sidarth to America. “On the other hand, this is an obvious political move, and it isn’t good diplomacy and certainly doesn’t look presidential,” Sabato said.
So apparently, both professors assign zero credibility to Allen's objections --- with Prof. Ramazani going so far as to compare Sen. Allen to the murderous clerics ("hard-liners") now running Iran, and Prof. Sabato claiming that Allen's objections were all based on political gamesmanship.
Upon reflection on global and domestic affairs, I decided that action was necessary to investigate this further, and to determine if it would be possible to open this critical lecture up to the public that I suspected was subsidizing this event (in whole or part), as is U.Va.'s practice with other speakers at events like this.
Further, I felt that such a venue would be an invaluable opportunity for the public to not only listen to and question Khatami, but also, to challenge (a) Prof. Ramzani's jihadist-appeasing Carter-worship, and (b) Prof. Sabato's apparent inability to see this controversy through anything except a momentary political prism.
I decided to invest some time to try to achieve this outcome, and if necessary, enlist some Charlottesville allies to provide key assistance.
-----------------------------------------------------------
5) Saturday, Sept. 2: A search of U.Va. websites reveals NOTHING about Khatami’s speech
----------------------------------------
On Saturday, September 2, I began to look at U.Va.'s main website, and found absolutely nothing regarding the Khatami speech.
Let me be clear: I LOOKED THROUGH THE ENTIRE WEBSITE, trying to find ANYTHING regarding Khatami - and there was nothing. Specifically, I clicked on and followed any link that would seem to have anything to do with "Today," "Upcoming," "Lectures," "Things To Do," and even typed "Khatami" into the search engine on the main page - only to come up with repeated "No Result Found" dead-screens.
The above sequence of screens, captured on September 4, provided some of the foundation of the presentation that I created and forwarded to the media that evening and the next day.
-----------------------------------------------------------
6) Monday, Sept. 4, Part I: U.Va.’s resistance to inquiries about Khatam’s speech - and my reaction
-----------------------------------------
First thing Monday (Labor Day), I called U.Va.'s community relations department to inquire about the Khatami speech, and where I could learn more about which department was sponsoring it, how to contact them, etc. I was referred to the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture.
A quick check of the IASC's website revealed the same thing as my review of U.Va.'s website: absolutely NOTHING about Khatami's upcoming speech:
Screen sequence captured on September 4 --- again, nothing regarding the Khatami speech... yet it clearly says "All events/lectures are free and open to the public."
I immediately called the IASC, and asked the following questions, to an unidentified person who seemed less than eager to discuss this matter:
Why is the public not being allowed to attend this speech?
.
Are any tax dollars being used to facilitate this event?
I was told that no answers could be given by phone, but that if I would put them in an email to Slavica Jakelic, IASC Associate Director and Lecturer, Center on Religion and Democracy, that I should have a reply shortly. The following is the body of the email that I sent to Ms. Jakelic:
"1) Is the speech by former president Khatami open to the public - and if so, where do I register to obtain a ticket?
"2) Is this speech being funded in whole or in part with UVa or Virginia taxpayer money?"
Here is the body of the email I got in reply from Ms. Jakelic, shortly thereafter:
"Mr. Khatami's lecture will be attended by the faculty, students, administrators, and friends of the University of Virginia. We also have a waiting list of interested public who will be contacted if the ticket for this event become available. Please let me know if you are interested in attending the lecture and we'll put your name and phone number on that waiting list.
"Mr. Khatami's lecture is sponsored by the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture."
Clearly, the IASC was intent on keeping a tight lid on the Khatami speech, or else they would have notified, en masse, both the U.Va. student body and the general public of this event, made arrangements for him to speak in a larger venue than the Dome Room, made public announcements, etc.
Furthermore, how could a "waiting list of interested public" emerge, if the speech itself was unannounced? The only possible answer is: more of the hand-selected group that had been advised on an exclusive basis of Khatami's speech wanted to attend than seats were available.
Also note that the email did not answer directly where the funding was coming from --- in particular, whether any tax dollars were being, are being or will be used to facilitate this event.
----------------------------------------------------
7) Monday, Sept. 4, Part II: My development and distribution of key media materials
----------------------------------------
As an outgrowth of my (admittedly limited) interaction with the IASC, and again viewing U.Va.'s and IASC's websites --- and finding absolutely nothing regarding the Khatami speech --- I decided that fast action was needed. I contacted a friend in the Charlottesville area whom I anticipated would be eager to help pry open the Khatami speech, if possible. I was correct.
For my part, I created the following items (available via email request):
A two-page press release with the headline: "Is the University of Virginia violating its own rules by forcing taxpayers to support an America-bashing speech by former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami, yet prohibiting the public from attending?
Apparently, the answer is yes." The press release also provides contrasting quotes from Khatami and Mr. Jefferson.
.
A 15-frame PDF presentation that documents in detail the total absence of any mention of this event on U.Va.'s and the IASC's websites --- along with the screens that feature both entities proclaiming that such events are "free and open to the public," often without advance registration.
I began to email both of these items to the primary local print and TV media sources early on Monday evening --- including the U.Va. student newspaper, the Cavalier Daily.
-----------------------------------------------------------
8) Tuesday, Sept. 5: Media contacts; new allies are discovered; a terrific student editorial
-----------------------------------------
The media began replying to my emails first thing Tuesday morning, and upon validation of my contentions, I agreed to provide additional information to flush out the fuller context of this story, on one condition: that neither my name nor my likeness are used in conjunction with their stories. My purpose in doing all this, as I explained, was not about me; it was only to help them to present this issue in a responsible, balanced and accurate context. Several indicated that they wanted to follow up with me the next day.
The most inspiring part of the day was when I was advised that the Cavalier Daily had published a full-column editorial, "Invitation Only," which essentially castigated the IASC for the way it was handling the Khatami speech. Key excerpts: "According to an e-mail from Slavica Jakelic, associate director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture, some students studying the Middle East have been invited by their professors to the lecture. However, there are hundreds of other students who would like to see the lecture.
"The best solution... is to offer the speech on a closed-circuit screen for a larger audience in another room. In hosting Khatami, the IASC could learn from the University's Miller Center of Public Affairs. The Miller Center routinely hosts high-profile speakers who fill its main auditorium to capacity. But rather than turning the extra people away, the Miller Center broadcasts the speaker on a closed-circuit feed in an overflow area. Those watching in that room can also ask questions of the speaker.
"Jakelic said that a closed-circuit feed would not be provided because of security concerns, but added, 'The taped lecture, however, can be provided for UVA classes...'
"(O)ffering students a post-event screening of his remarks is tantamount to totally excluding all but a select few students from the event."
Although the Cavalier Daily did not address the fact that the public is also being excluded not only from the event, but from being made aware that it is even taking place --- in direct contradiction to the broad publicity and open invitations that U.Va. provides for other high-profile public speakers that it hosts --- the editorial was exactly on-target.
-----------------------------------------------------------
9) Wednesday, Sept. 6: U.VA. SURRENDERS, publicly announcing that it will permit limited citizen & student attendance at Khatami speech
-----------------------------------------
In a stunning reversal from the position articulated in the previous day's Cavalier Daily editorial, U.Va. and the IASC announced that (as reported in that morning's Daily Progress, the area's only daily newspaper):"For those who don't hold one of the exclusive tickets (to the Khatami speech), the University of Virginia has set up an alternative location. The speech will be carried via closed-circuit television to the Newcomb Hall Theater. The theater, which seats about 400 people, will be open on a first-come, first-served basis beginning at 11:30a.m. Thursday (speech starts at noon)...
"(T)he former president will not be taking direct questions, but U.Va. officials say those in the invited audience will have the opportunity to submit written questions, some of which will be posed to Khatami at the conclusion of his speech."
Unmentioned in this article is the fact that, within 24 hours, the "security concerns" that U.Va. and the IASC claimed would prevent them from providing a closed-circuit feed to a larger venue, or from inviting the public and additional students, had evaporated into the ether - with no explanation whatsoever.
But as is demonstrated by their comments in the coming days, this was not the only gaffe that the U.Va. and the IASC would be caught in.
Another interesting part of this reversal is that the story describing it was featured by the Daily Progress directly next to an article discussing the larger context of this issue, "Khatami's U.S. Visit Sparks Controversy."
Excerpts:
"Khatami's five -city U.S. tour this week has ignited both controversy and curiosity --- infuriating former hostages from the 1979-1981 U.S. Embassy seizure and alarming some in Congress but winning praise from foreign policy experts. The former president's speech at Washington National Cathedral is a hot ticket, with attendance now by invitation only."
(NOTE: Keep that last sentence in mind, as you read the article "Security Tight For Khatami" in Section 10, in which U.Va. officials claim that they "originally wanted to hold the Khatami speech in a large venue," but that the State Department would not permit it, and thus they were "forced" to hold it in the celebrated Dome Room of the Rotunda. Yet at the National Cathedral --- centrally-located in Washington, DC, on a per-capita basis the most violent city in America --- tickets were being handed out on a first-come, first-served basis. Also keep this sentence in mind when you recall in Section 8, how the IASC proclaimed that a closed-circuit video feed to a large theater at U.Va. would pose a "security" threat --- a determination which was mysteriously solved less than 24 hours later.)
So even though the public and additional students who would be in attendance at the Newcomb Hall Theater would not be able to ask questions of Khatami, at least they were now:
- Aware of the fact that the speech was taking place, where, and when, and how to attend
. - Aware of at least some of the controversy surrounding Khatami's speeches around the USA
Things began to happen very quickly at this point:
- My colleague in Charlottesville did an (off-camera) interview with a major TV network affiliate, in which he provided the reporter with a detailed description of why Khatami should be challenged on his rants against America, his defense of Hezbollah, and the true level of sincerity of his pleas for "peace" and "tolerance" and, most of all, the "dialogue" which he (via his enablers at U.Va. and the IASC) refuses to engage in
. - I did several other casual, anonymous interviews with other local media sources
. - In all cases, I and my colleague provided (or offered to provide) the reporters with extensive resources to demonstrate why the opposition to Khatami and his speeches was legitimate, and which went a long way towards debunking the seemingly benevolent things he was saying during his lecture tour of America
In both cases, we were assured that our views, and the facts we provided would be considered, and likely featured in the stories that they were producing for the coming evening, and the following day.In reality, the major TV nework affiliate featured neither our interviews, nor the facts that we presented, and which was the basis for their interview requests.
And after seeing the local media's coverage that night and the next day, I understood why: It was abundantly clear that it was going to play the story primarily as being one of a well-intentioned former president of Iran bringing "a message of peace and tolerance," and who was seeking "dialogue" with Americans --- exactly as Khatami and his enablers wanted.
Although I am an optimist, in this regard, it was hard to find anything to be optimistic about, except the fact that at least now, U.Va. and the IASC had been dragged kicking and screaming into opening up the Khatami speech to at least some additional members of the student body, and local citizens.
-----------------------------------------------------------
10) Thursday, Sept. 7, Part I: The morning of the Khatami speech; the near-complete dhimmification ofthe local media; allies rush to action
-----------------------------------------
Starting first thing in the morning, all the local news media had the Khatami speech --- and the fact that citizens could attend it, via videolink --- in their lead-off stories.
BUT the local media apparently decided to ignore nearly all of what they had discovered via the information I and my colleague provided, and the knowledge they could have obtained had they followed up on it. Their reasons are known only to them. But their coverage was an example of what happens when truth is sacrificed upon the altar of "tolerance" and "multi-culturalism," which, in summary, permits no nation (or representative of it) to be judged, condemned, or exalted above others, based on objective standards.
And, according to Robert Spencer, founder of JihadWatch, this approach leads people --- including the media --- to become "dhimmis," which he describes as:"A cardinal principle of dhimmi laws is that the 'protection' of the dhimmis is canceled if a dhimmi 'mentions something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam' ('Umdat al-Salik, o11.10[5]). The dhimmi mentality of whitewashing all the sins of the jihadis who subjugated them is now spreading into American textbooks, via misguided ideas of multiculturalism and tolerance."
To read, listen to or watch the Charlottesville media on the morning of September 7 --- merely 4 days before the fifth anniversary of the jihadists' murder of 3,000 Americans --- was to observe otherwise responsible local journalists and media figures become dhimmis. Neither Khatami, nor any of his media advisors, nor the most "politically-correct" professor at U.Va. could have asked for a more sympathetic portrayal. All were determined to present the Khatami visit in the best possible light, as a man who was going to speak at U.Va. to help foster "peace" and "tolerance" and "understanding," via the "dialogue" he wished to engage in.
To be fair, however, their nightly TV and radio programs did feature interview subjects who pointed out the "other side" of the Khatami speech, but not a single media figure would personally touch this with a ten-foot pole; they were intent on merely "presenting another viewpoint," without acknowledging whether it was legitimate or not.
Three news features exemplify the dhimmitude I refer to, in the largest circulation newspapers in the Charlottesville area, and at U.Va., respectively: the Daily Progress, and the Cavailer Daily.
The Daily Progress featured the Khatami speech on its front page for the first time since it was discovered (on September 1):
"SECURITY TIGHT FOR KHATAMI"
As the title implies, this story dealt primarily with the sensational spectacle of having such extensive security measures in place to protect Khatami (while not mentioning that all this security, along with transport, was being paid for by U.S. and Virginia taxpayers, whether 
they approved of this use of their money or not). In addition to reaffirming how citizens could attend the live broadcast of Khatami's speech in the Newcomb Hall Theater, there were three items of note:
(1) "(O)rganizers of Khatami’s visit to Charlottesville... originally hoped to hold the speech at the Cabell Hall auditorium or possibly even University Hall, where large numbers of people would be able to attend - but the State Department put the kibosh on those notions. They weren’t going to be responsible for checking up on hundreds or even thousands of people. Therefore, the Rotunda, with its small venue, was chosen. 'We didn’t really have a choice, if we wanted him to come, we were told this was the way it had to be,' Sachedina* said. (*Abdulaziz Sachedina, a U.Va. professor of religious studies, is largely responsible for bringing Khatami to Charlottesville)
(2) “People should be talking to one another, rather than simply showing their power,” Sachedina said. “Khatami has the kind of vision for the world that is needed.”
(3) But not everyone is thrilled to have Khatami coming to Charlottesville, and hold the former leader responsible for the atrocities committed during his rule. “It’s a terrible shame,” said Bahman Batmanghelidj, an Iranian-born developer from McLean whose daughter attended UVa. Batmanghelidj, a big-time political donor in Virginia, said thousands of people were tortured and killed while Khatami was president, and that for him to come to UVa, with its traditions of democracy and freedom from religious authority over the government, was inappropriate. “Mr. Jefferson must be whipping around like a top in his grave,” he said.
The reader is left to form his/her own opinion on the validity of what Mr. Batmanghelidj said. Had the Daily Progress researched this matter, they would have discovered that the U.S. State Department has listed Iran as "a major state sponsor of terror" for many years, and that Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and many other organizations have repeatedly documented Iran's ghastly abuses of its own citizens --- including under Khatami's rule.
--------------------------
The Daily Progress also featured this full-column editorial on the Khatami speech:
"PERSPECTIVE ON FREEDOM"
Excerpts:
"The controversy of the Khatami visit is a controversy of many viewpoints. Americans who were hostages in Iran 25 years ago and Iranians who fled their homeland under previous purges are angered that the United States would host a former president whose leadership helped move Iran away from liberal secularism and back toward religious fundamentalism... (I)n Iran, fundamentalists are appalled that their former president would be visiting undisciplined, unreligious, unsavory America and consorting with the enemy. Mr. Khatami puts himself at risk from the extremists in both camps."
The Daily Progress considers the opposition to Khatami's taxpayer-funded speeches by Americans who were kidnapped and held hostage in Iran for 444 days to be "extremists," on par with the Iranian fundamentalists who consider the United States to be "the Great Satan," and who support Iran as the world's #1 exporter and supporter of Islamist terror? This is a living definition of outrageous moral relativism, that is all the more shocking in that it erupted from the only daily newspaper in Mr. Jefferson's beloved hometown.
"Here, Mr. Khatami is free to speak his mind and we are free to speak ours."
"We may applaud or abhor Mr. Khatami’s visit, but the fact that we can say what we think, rather than be forced into secrecy, is of supreme importance. Caught up in the passion and the protests, let us not forget the foundation that makes protests possible even as it also protects Mr. Khatami’s right to speak: our democracy, our liberty, our freedom of speech."
Mr. Khatami's "right to speak?" Where? At whose expense? In a taxpayer-funded, hermetically-sealed bubble for him to propagandize against America, without fear of anyone opposing or questioning him?
And when the article says, "Here, Mr. Khatami is free to speak his mind and we are free to speak ours," the Daily Progress knew full well as of 6pm on Monday, September 4 (via my e-mailed press release and presentation) that there would be NO free speech permitted at Khatami's U.Va. lecture --- that U.Va. and the IASC had attempted to bring Khatami in under a cloak of secrecy, and they would be permitting only a hand-picked group of students and "guests" to attend, and may or may not select questions from this elite audience, which Khatami may or may not choose to answer.
--------------------------
The Cavalier Daily featured their second full-column editorial regarding this event - but unlike the original one, this one (a) took a decidedly politically-correct approach, (b) brushed off as illegitimate the criticism of high-level American politicians, including, again, Senator Allen, and (c) even went so far as to claim that Khatami's visit is congruous with Mr. Jefferson's ideals:
"WELCOMING KHATAMI"
Excerpts:
If there were ever a place where someone like Khatami should be free to speak, it's on the Grounds of Mr. Jefferson's University. This university inherits a tradition of free expression and toleration of radically differing viewpoints. An invitation for Khatami to visit doesn't mean the University or the audience must embrace what he stands for or agree with his words. What it means is that the University values a fair competition of ideas --- a dialogue that Khatami's visit will strengthen rather than weaken.
Part of the criticism of Khatami's visit lies in our current state of tension with Iran. By inviting him, critics claim, we're strengthening an enemy that threatens the U.S. and our allies with a nuclear program begun during Khatami's term. But consider the context of the conflict between the U.S. and Iran, and the larger struggle against what the president terms "Islamo-facism." The enemy is one that crushes opposition, jails dissenters and will tolerate no other worldview than its own. It is an enemy that punishes honest disagreement as a crime -- directly the opposite of Jefferson's outlook: "I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion without imputing to them criminality."
I leave it to the reader to judge whether the Cavalier Daily's references to "dialogue," "free expression," "toleration" and Mr. Jefferson's principles are appropriate and accurate --- or are outrageous, dhimministically-driven pablum.
And if you answer that it's the latter, then the question must be asked:: What exatly is U.Va. "teaching" these students that they could inculcate such a terribly fundamentally inaccurate view of Mr. Jefferson, and the principles he lived by, in their minds?
--------------------------
NEW ALLIES ARE DISCOVERED
In the course of my research, and that of several colleagues in Charlottesville, we discovered new allies both within and outside of U.Va., who expressed interest in organizing demonstrations and protests against Khatami.
Obviously, there was practically no time to do so. Even if the speech had been publicly announced weeks before --- as it should have been --- to organize, obtain any necessary permits, create signage and posters for, and obtain public and media attention for such a demonstration/protest is a LOT of work. To do so in less than 24 hours (which is essentially all that U.Va.'s and the IASC's actions and omissions permitted) would be all but impossible.
But as you'll see in the next section (11), some enterprising and energetic allies within U.Va. created and posted throughout the campus some flyers and handbills that, while perhaps lacking the polish that their creators may have intended, got their points across well. They deserve profound congratulations for their last-minute efforts on behalf of principle, in honor of Mr. Jefferson's (true) ideals, and the (true) heritage of U.Va.
-----------------------------------------------------------
11) Thursday, Sept. 7, Part II: THE KHATAMI SPEECH - FULL COVERAGE
---------------------------------------
The first thing one noted upon approaching U.Va., and the Rotunda in particular, was the extensive security. Between the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service (DSS), the Virginia State Police, Albemarle County Police, Charlottesville City Police, and University Police, along with a host of plainclothed security officers --- capped off by a sniper and a "spotter" atop the dome of the Rotunda --- it was clear that an enormous amount of U.S. taxpayer money had been expended to provide security for Mr. Khatami's visit.
Another thing that was unmistakable to those who know the Rotunda well was the fact that this normally sun-lit temple of liberty, dialogue and reasoned discourse, with the broad windows that Mr. Jefferson had designed for it, was completely choked off of the sun's disinfecting rays: every single window was covered over --- an uncanny visual analogy for exactly what U.Va. and the IASC had attempted to hide from public view. To understand Mr. Jefferson is to know that he would never have permitted this at his beloved university.
Upon entering the U.Va. grounds, however, lovers of liberty and (real) "dialogue" were treated to several flyers and handbills (below) that were hurriedly produced by heretofore unnamed allies within the university, and distributed throughout the grounds prior to Khatami's speech.
Khatami's speech, which began at 12:00, had two distinct audiences:
- The hand-selected group of professors, students and "guests" that U.Va. and
the IASC invited to listen to him live in the Dome Room
. - The students and citizens who were permitted at the last possible minute into the Newcomb Hall Theater, to view Khatami's speech via a one-way videolink (which enabled no questions --- per U.Va. and IASC dictate)
The good news is that despite the fact that practically no U.Va. students or cititzens were even aware of Khatami's speech more than 24 hours beforehand, thanks to fast activism, the 450-seat theater was filled to near-capacity: 
After an overbearingly dhimministic, culturally-sensitive introduction, filled with a variety of platitudes ("your Excellency") from several U.Va. professors, Khatami took to the podium in the Dome Room and began speaking.
Mohammed Khatami lectures 140 hand-picked guests (and 450 proletariat) in a U.Va.-provided hermetically-sealed bubble, on why America's foreign policy is immoral, why Hezbollah's jihadist butchers have earned his moral sanction, and why religion and politics are not necessarily incompatible
In summary, Khatami's speech at U.Va. was very similar to those that he's been giving across America. He did end up taking three questions (hand-picked from the select audience, by one of his admirers), which did not substantively challenge him on any of his most incendiary statements --- or, I would argue, the blatant contradictions between his claims that he "does not engage in harsh rhetoric," and his outrageously harsh accusations against America, and Israel. Judge for yourself:
The "transcript" of Khatami's speech is located here. (although official, it contains errors, such as the introduction)
The audio of the speech is located here.
The video of the speech is located here.
And then, quick as he arrived, Khatami was gone, escorted back to his motorcade by a heavily armed posse of U.S. taxpayer-provided security forces:
LOCAL POST-SPEECH NEWS COVERAGE:
(Sept. 7) UVAToday: Khatami Speaks at U.Va., Calls for Dialogue to End Violence, War, Terror
(Sept. 7) Daily Progress: Former Iran President Urges U.S. To Stay In Iraq
(Sept. 7) Daily Press (Hampton Roads, VA): Former Iran Leader Criticizes U.S. Iraq Policy At U.Va. Address
(Sept. 8) Daily Progress: Ex-Iran Chief Speaks: Discusses U.S. Policy At UVa
SOME NATIONAL NEWS COVERAGE OF THE KHATAMI VISIT:
(Sept. 7): Boston Globe:Romney's Foreign Folly
(Sept. 8) NewsMax: Torture Victims Blast Khatami Visit
(Sept. 14) ABC Nightline: George Stephanopoulos interviews Khatami; watch how Khatami: (a) denounces people who use "harsh rhetoric" or "name names,"[*] (b) flatly and repeatedly denies that Iran has been arming and funding Hezbollah, while (c) repeatedly claiming that he is seeking "peace" and "dialogue."
[*] Now, try to square that with the following Khatami quote:
"America is the root of worldwide terror...(I)t's difficult to distinguish between President Bush and Osama bin Laden... (W)e love Hezbollah."
(July 14, 2005 on Al-Arabiyya TV; Source: MEMRI)
-----------------------------------------------------------
12) Side note: Khatami vs. Ronald Reagan - A study in contrasting styles and decorum; Harvard’s bold decision re the Khatami speech
-----------------------------------------
Another aspect of this controversy worth considering is Khatami's lack of tact, as contrasted to that employed by one of the greatest American diplomats and orators, Ronald Reagan.
One would think that given (a) the controversy surrounding his speaking tour, (b) the rich legacy of U.Va. as an academic temple of liberty, and (c) the fact that it was U.S. and Virgina taxpayer dollars that were facilitatng his speech here --- that Mr. Khatami would at least have the wisdom, if not the common courtesy, to comment on these topics. Instead, he said not a word.
Despite the official "transcript" (above) of his speech, Khatami said NOTHING about Thomas Jefferson, or his university, at the opening of his speech. He just went right into his lecture.
In contrast, whenever Ronald Reagan was speaking in other nations, he always strived to learn something about the venue he was speaking in, its history, the people who created it, etc. It was more than a matter of courtesy --- it was smart diplomacy, and simply good manners. 
A good example of this Reaganesque approach is the speech he gave to a very suspicious British Parliament in 1982. Read / listen to this speech - then listen to Khatami's (links below). It's hard to think of a more diametrically opposing approach to public speaking, especially to less -than-swooning audiences.
An even stronger example of Reagan's diplomacy --- and especially, his openness --- is found in his speech to the students of Moscow State University in 1988. Listen / read here. Like his British speech, Reagan spoke of the USSR, of both his admiration of and disagreements with its history and actions.
Then, Reagan opened the forum up to an unrestricted question-and-answer session with the students. Listen to it --- it is a marvelous way to spend about 45 minutes, to hear an American hero like Ronald Reagan mix it up with young Soviets.
Also, and in a very related, Reaganeque note, regarding the hermetically-sealed environment that U.Va. and the IASC provided Khatami in which to give his monologue (lecture), the dean of Harvard University provided the administration of U.Va. with an object lesson in how Khatami's speech should have been handled --- if their interest was to facilitate a real "dialogue" over his comments:
(Sept. 7): WJLA (AP; Washington DC): Harvard Dean Defends Khatami Invitation
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) - The dean of Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government defended the decision to invite former Iranian President Mohammad
Khatami to speak on the eve of the anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. "Do we listen to those that we disagree with, and vigorously challenge them, or do we close our ears completely?" Dean David Ellwood said in an interview published Thursday in The Boston Globe. Ellwood said he approved the invitation, first proposed by faculty after they learned Khatami would be speaking at the United Nations. He also emphasized that Khatami would not be allowed to visit unless he was willing to take unscripted questions."
I now leave it to you to determine the validity of Khatami's comments, of the way U.Va. and the IASC handled this controversy, and the way that the news media covered the speech and the issues surrounding it.
The media and local intellectuals stressed the importance of having "dialogue" over Khatami and the troublesome issues he brought to our table. Well, this is my contribution towards the "dialogue" that U.Va. and the IASC prevented from occurring.
And now, as Forrest Gump would say, "That's all I have to say about that."
-----------------------------------------------------------
13) WRAP-UP: Lessons to be learned in the continuing battle over balance & openness in taxpayer-funded universities
-------------------------------
Based on my experience in this controversy, I believe there are a number of steps that concerned citizens, students, faculty and alumni can take to prevent Khatami-like fiascos from happening:
- Determine the policy of the educational institution regarding access to non-academic speeches and lectures that are being funded in whole or in part with tax dollars. A simple letter or email to the univeristy president should suffice for obtaining a definitive answer. Assuming you discover that the policy is one of openness (like U.Va.'s is supposed to be), then do the following:
.
Identify and subscribe to all newsletters and email lists that are operated by the university and key departments that routinely sponsor speeches/lectures that are (supposed to be) open to the public.
.Regularly review the university's websites, particularly their "schedule of events," "calendars" and any other pages that list upcoming speeches.
.If you discover that a speech was held outside of public view, and without any kind of promotion, immediately contact the head of the sponsoring department, and ask to be notified of any such speeches in the future. Also, write a formal letter of complaint to the president of the university, and cc it to the head of the department. Keep copies of these letters, in case there is another breach of trust (or policy), and you need to take further action.
. If this becomes a persistent problem, then compile your documentation and forward it, along with a brief letter/email, to: (a) the local media, (b) your state legislators. Also, consider writing a letter to the editor of your local newspaper, as well as any run by the students of the university. If, as in this incendiary speech, you feel that another critical viewpoint was not presented, you might also request --- strongly but politely --- that the university bring in another speaker who will provide that missing viewpoint.
.All of the above are meant to (a) facilitate a "balanced" learning environment, and (b) remind professors, faculty, administration and support staff at tax-funded universities who they work for, and who they are accountable to: the taxpayers. In the case of this speech, U.Va. apparently forgot or were attempting to evade this indisputable principle. It's up to taxpayers like you and me to remind them, from time to time.NOTE: I do not claim to be an expert in these matters --- so if any readers have more knowledge or constructive suggestions regarding the above, please email me at jonquix@hotmail.com.
-----------------------------------------------------------
14) A CALL TO ARMS: YOU can help compel U.Va. to bring in a speaker representing the other side of the issues that Khatami addressed
-----------------------------------------
After discussing this matter with a variety of people both within and outside of U.Va., I am now convinced that if we join together in a cohesive force, we can compel U.Va. to sponsor a speech by a noted individual who will present an opposing viewpoint on the controversial issues that Khatami addressed.
The individuals that immediately come to mind, who possess a combination of intimate knowledge of these issues, as well as refined speaking skills, are: (a) Benjamin Netenyahu, former Prime Minister of Israel, and (b) Dan Gillerman, Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations.
As I have no experience in rallying, organizing and supporting such an effort, I am open to any and all constructive suggestions as to how this goal can be realized. Email me at jonquix@hotmail.com.
I anticipate that it would begin with a petition drive, directed at both the top administrators of both U.Va. and the IASC. So, please email your thoughts, along with your name, address and phone number (standard requirements) to me at the above address.
Or, please fill out a "comment" at the bottom of this blog entry, and I wil include it in my petition.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!
================================
UPDATE, APRIL 1, 2007: KHATAMI JUSTIFIES IRAN'S CAPTURE OF 15 BRITISH SOLDIERS; LABELS BUSH "TYRANT OF OUR AGE"
Well, well, well. A "man of peace," the UVa scholars and the media said. And remember, as noted at the end of Section 11, Khatami doesn't "name names." Well, apparently the mask is finally and completely coming off...
From Little Green Footballs:
Former Iranian president Mohamed Khatami, who was recently feted as a “moderate” on a tour of US and British universities, and who gave an autograph to John F. Kerry in Davos, boasted to the London daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi that Iran’s abduction of 15 British sailors is a demonstration of the strength of the Islamic world:
Former Iranian President Mohamed Khatami told the London daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi during his visit to Egypt that “George Bush is the tyrant of our age, and history will remember him as a rare variety of murderer of children and women.”
On Iran’s abduction of the 15 British servicemen, he said: “Anyone who saw this action as inappropriate has become accustomed to seeing the Islamic and Arab world as weak, as not defending itself from harm, and as having borders that are wide open... The behavior of the U.S. and of its allies is very barbaric, and they want the Arab and Islamic world to remain weak forever.”
He also noted that “Iran’s relations with Hamas and Hizbullah are eternal.”
Isn't that sweet. The "man of peace" has now endorsed Islamist kidnappings, and some of the most notorious, bloodthirsty murderers on the planet. And if that isn't quite enough to turn your stomach... read more at LGF here, as to how Islamists deal with those of other religions.
And I'm sure the MSM is going to be covering the Khatami rant, and how almost the entire American intelligentsia worships at his feet, any day now... any day now... any day now...
-------------- crickets --------------
Uh-huh.
====================================
UPDATE APRIL 24: KHATAMI, MAN OF "PEACE" AND "DIALOGUE" AND "TOLERANCE," TELLS ISRAELI REPORTERS TO "GO TO HELL!!!"
Read the story here. Amazing... where are all those cow-towing scholars who advertised Khatami as being the living embodiment of moral values?
Original content is © Copyright 2006-2007 by Jon Quixote. All rights reserved. Contact
jonquix@hotmail.com
for information.
========================================================================== ==========================================================================
heard nothing from him since August 11, I assumed that the goods were still on display. I told him that if I did not hear back about the matter that same day, I would buy samples of the merchandise I found so offensive, and deliver same to Mr. John Casteen (pictured, right), U.Va.'s President, with another request for their removal.Moreover, I find Mr. Sandridge's apparent position completely at odds with your ludicrous statement: "The University's bookstore is apolitical." In fact, the very presence of the items in question that are typical of the "hate Bush" stance of many Democrats indicates that the University bookstore and therefore, by association, the University, itself, is the opposite of apolitical. The conclusion is simply unavoidable.
