Daily Doodle: Back in Action!

Notes On My Ahmadinejadventure

(Note: I apologize for the un-timely nature of this blog post, given that the whole world has already posted about this, but I'm trying to be thorough and, well, that takes time.)

Wow.

I'd been thinking the actual Ahmadinejad talk would be an anti-climax, but... wow.

Ahmadinejad entered first to confusion ("Is he that one with the beard?") and then to a surprising amount of applause. A whole section even gave him a standing ovation. However, it was nothing compared to the huge round of applause Bollinger received upon his entrance. His speech, simply put, was fantastic. He began with a defense of his decision, claiming that deciding to listen to someone like Ahmadinejad does not imply that we agree, or that we are weak or naive. He told those who disagreed with his choice that he understood their position and found it reasonable. One of the important parts of free speech is debating free speech itself, including its limits. Still, he stressed that this speech was not about any of Ahmadinejad's rights, but about our right to listen. Then Bollinger dropped his first bomb, saying that we needed to understand "the mind of evil." Yes, he used the E-word. It caused a lot of murmurs through the audience.

Bollinger next outlined the tough issues he wanted Ahamadinejad to address:

-The crackdown on scholars, activists, and writers - In specific, Bollinger called for the release of Kian Tajbakhsh, a Columbia graduate who was imprisoned in Iran. He was set free a few days ago, seemingly in response to our invitation, but he is apparently stil under house arrest. Bollinger demanded his safe return to Columbia, where he apparently now has a job as a professor. Ahmadinejad never responded to this, but I suspect we'll be seeing Tajbakhsh soon. If this guy goes free, I think that alone is enough to justify this whole event.

-The execution of minors and the violation of civil rights that public hanging represents.

-His dispute with the west and the way most Iranian feel it's overshadowing the terrible situation within Iran.

-His Holocaust Denial- Another bombshell, Bollinger said Ahmadinejad's view on "the most documented event in history" shows he is "either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated." Whammy.

-His opposition to Israel- Apparently Columbia has over 800 graduates in Israel?

-Reports of Iran funding Iraqi insurgents.

-His claims of wanting nuclear power for peaceful reasons and the dissonance with his constant threats of military action.

Bollinger had another zinger, telling Ahmadinejad that his actions "exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator." He finished by saying that he doubted Ahmadinejad had the intellectual courage to answer these questions rather than hiding behind his fanatical viewpoint, but he hoped he would. It's hard to dislike Prezbo after that speech (not that I did before), because frankly, he's a supreme badass. He had a lot to prove with that speech and he hit every ball out of the park.

Ahmadinejad's speech was, well, weaker, but very interesting. He opened first with a prayer from the Koran and a few complaints, namely that Bollinger was a bad host; in addition to being rude, Prezbo had also "vaccinated" us to oppose Ahmadinejad. The spin engine officially running, Ahmadinejad began his speech which, oddly, focused on education.

I'm not really going to say too much about his speech, because most of it was circular and oddly-phrased. It's been said repeatedly that the goal of this event was to open dialogue. Ahmadinejad may have been spinning like mad but his pre-written speech was very telling. Heavily steeped in biblical language and using the word "science" haphazardly, Ahmadinejad's language sounded less like a speech from now and more like pre-Newtownian natural philosophy. It was also biblical in its utter lack of structure. There was no logical flow, just roundabout restating of his main point. I think sometimes we forget that even the less fundamentalist Arabs are still heavily influenced by the Koran and its strange logic.

Another explanation is that Ahmadinejad was just lulling us into a sort of trance. Eventually I found myself thinking, "Yeah, he's just saying obvious things that I have to agree with." As a result, when about three-quarters of the way through his speech he suddenly, and vaguely at first, began a tirade against America, it took a moment for me to realize I no longer agreed with him. Next though you know he's talking about how corrupt people (read: America) are using science and wisdom to mislead others for personal gain, by creating an insecure atmosphere and excuse wrongdoings.

He finally got to the real meat of his speech toward the end, first talking about nukes. They're bad uses of science because they are bad for the world, and because we (the west) have created a monopoly on science by barring Iran from starting a nuclear program. He moved on to discuss his holocaust denial, prefacing it by saying that his "main job is a university instructor." This was important because he framed his holocaust denial as merely looking at the Holocaust from different perspectives. In addition, he claimed his primary issue with the Holocaust was that the Palestinians were paying for something that happened in Europe.

He returned to the nuclear issue, this time more aggressively, saying Iran has cooperated with inspectors and none have found any evidence of using the nuclear research to create weapons. At that point, the bell rang signaling that Ahmadinejad was out of time, but he ignored it, until it rang a second time and Dean Coatsworth stopped him. This was another shrewd move on his part. It made him look like a martyr, being shut down by the mean Americans and their biased debate rules.

This is a good time as any to mention that I was SHOCKED by the amount of support Ahmadinejad had in the audience. Sure, some of them were plants, but there were definitely a fair amount of people in the audience who applauded him. Whether it was because he made arguably true statements about America in the midst of evading his own issues or because these people generally supported him is hard to say. Either way, sorta scary. On the other hand, a lot of people were booing him. I just find booing kinda distasteful in general. It really doesn't add anything to a dialogue and usually just comes off as rude.

Anyway, then it was time for the question and answer session. I'm gonna do this in notes format... well, sorta.

Q: Do you seek the destruction of Jews and Israel?
A: We love every nation. Also, we have lots of Jews in Iran and always have a Jewish representative in the government, but we need to let Palestinians solve issues for themselves and that is why we call for a free referendum in the Middle East to decide Israel's future without interference from the west.

Follow-up Q: We'd like a more specific answer, and a simple yes or no will suffice. (I felt that was sort of tacky)
A: Not a yes or no, but more of the same.

Q: Why is your government providing aid to terrorists and will you stop?
A: If someone set off bombs around you, would you award them or call them a terrorist? We have known terrorism in Iran. The past Iranian President and Prime Minister were killed in a terrorist attack. There have been over 4000 killed by one group (he didn't mention which group, anybody know?) and America is supporting them. We were the first to oppose terrorism. We need to eradicate the root causes of terrorism.

Q: How can you deny the Holocaust?
A: What is so bad about asking questions? I am a researcher, I just want to research.(except longer winded)

Follow-up: But we have established FACTS.
A: More of the same.

Q: What are your views on Homosexuals and Women? Why do you mistreat them and execute them and such?
A: We have lots of freedoms. Two of our vice-presidents are women and we have hundreds of female scientists. Our nation is free. We have an 80-90% voter turnout which is the best in the world (Is this true?)
As for executions, don't you have capital punishment? We execute drug traffickers because they are destroying our country. (then there's a long rant about drug trafficking).

Follow-up: We weren't talking about drugs, but about homosexuals and women.
A: And here's what's become the big pull-away Ahmadinejad quote: "In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that phenomenon. Who said that?" But women are respected. Families are happy when they have girls instead of boys. Girls are the best of God's creations and we treat them so well that they have less legal responsibilities.

(I think part of the problem is that these two issues are always brought up together when in fact they're very different. Ahmadinejad is actually historically pretty good to Iranian women, but is frequently overpowered by the Ayatollah, which was the case when he allowed them to attend football games. While the women's rights issue may be a large one in Iran, it isn't really something you can hold against Ahmadinejad. On the other hand, his regime has been hanging homosexuals. That is something you can hold against him.

Okay, back to his words, not mine.)

Q: What did you hope to accomplish in coming here? What would you have said if you had been able to go to the World Trade Center site?
A: I came here because I was invited. In Iran you respect guests. At the World Trade Center site I wanted to show respect and sympathy. Why would you think that's an insult. It's a pessimistic approach. If we looked at the real causes of 9/11 and put it all together we can fix those problems.

Q: The nuclear weapons question.
A: The same answer he gave before, except a bit more nuanced. This is a political issue not a legal issue. There is no indication that our nuclear program is anything but peaceful.

Q: Is Iran prepared to open discussions with the US?
A: From the start, we have been ready to negotiate with all countries. We want talks, with mutual respect. We had three rounds of talks about Iraq with Bush. Wants to debate Bush in the UN but Bush won't.

At the end, he thanked us all and invited us to come speak at Iranian Universities. Coatsworth ended with a snarky remark about Ahmadinejad not answering questions well and that was that. Ahmadinejad dodged questions deftly, but I think his answers were very telling. People have said he made his speech to his supporters but I really think he tailored it to the audience, spinning his answers into attacks against U.S. policies that liberals are (or should be) uncomfortable with, for example our controlling who is allowed to have a nuclear program, our wiretapping, our presence in Iraq (implying that we are the real terrorists), our capital punishment system, etc. He gets us agreeing with him so that we forget he's not even answering the question he's supposed to be. That said, I think this was a clear failure for him and reports, besides Bill O'Reilly of course, seem to suggest that people have really come around and are more supportive of the event after the fact.

I'm going to look at my video footage tomorrow and see if there's anything worth posting but I doubt it.

For now, though, Sam Roberts, citzen journalist, signing off.

Posting Posters

It's hard to tell exactly what this counter-posterer's agenda is. Does she oppose the position the poster takes, or its use of brutal imagery?


I talked to the guy putting these posters up. He just thinks the whole thing is less politics and more theater, and decided to add to the absurdity.


Apparently people think we're actually close to war in Iran. Anyway, this poster shows a lot of dedication.


Not exactly a poster, but there is something funny about seeing an NYPD car parked on top of a Pro-Iran poster.

What I think is especially funny about the posters, though these aren't the best examples of this, is that a its hard to tell who put some of them up. It's not always clear whether they support Ahmadinejad or oppose him. I guess that's good, because it forces you to really think, but it's also sort of silly that people can't make posters that make their views clear.

All Quiet on the Westside Front

So I got up bright and early, video camera in hand, prepared to do some citizen journalism at the crazy protests.

Except... there aren't any. Right now it's just a lot of frustrated reporters trying and failing to do man on the street stuff and a couple people who are already in line to get their seats (doors aren't until 11, though).

In the place of protesters we've got posters and counter-posters and counter-everything posters. I've been taking some pictures of my favorite ones, which'll be up when I get back to my own computer and can upload them (I'm in Butler right now.)

Basically, the mood right now is that oh-so-cliche-calm before the storm, just with a few people frantically trying to find that one spot that still hasn't been covered in a poster.

I'll keep you all informed.

Craziness

If haven't been following the Bwog, you really should be. Their coverage of the Ahmadinejad event the growing protests has been excellent. Apparently, things are really getting intense. They estimate there will be ten thousand protesters tomorrow. Yes, TEN. THOUSAND.

I'm going try and get some footage of the insanity with my video camera tonight and tomorrow. Obviously I'll post anything good and I'll definitely have a post-speech entry, so watch out for that too.

A Different Perspective on Notecards

So Bwog compiled a list of all the statements student groups have been making about Ahmadinejad. For me, one thing stands out. It seems a lot of people are upset because students will not be asking questions directly. Instead, they will be submitting questions on notecards; the moderator will then select questions from this pool and ask them.

The objection stems from the notion that this is a form of censorship, cutting us out of the conversation. The student leaders are using it as evidence that Columbia is not as interested in discourse as it pretends to be. I disagree. I think it's actually an excellent choice for this particular speaker for several reasons:

1. Ahamdinejad is a smooth speaker and spinster. Columbia students, on the other hand, may be incredibly smart, but they're also frequently overly emotional speakers. I remember a few years ago when John Ashcroft came to Columbia. Despite a number of hard questions, he came out looking better than the students because he kept his composure unlike the students who shouted and generally came off as somewhat barbaric. I think Ahmadinejad will inspire feelings significantly more intense than those Ashcroft inspired and it would be a terrible shame if he came out of this as the reasonable one in the debate. Having the moderator ask the questions ensures that they will be posed calmly and that focus will be on the thrust of the question rather than the anger of the questioner.

2. Even though half of the time allotted is reserved for questions, there will undoubtedly be too little time for all the questions people want to ask. I would rather the best questions get asked than those of the students who rush the mics right when they open up. Those will probably be the angriest students, and therefore the ones most likely to pose poorly-thought out questions that are nothing more than thinly-veiled statements of hatred. I'd rather hear from the more contemplative students. Notecards ensure that both get a fair opportunity to have their questions answered, which can only result in better questions.

I'll admit, all of this rests on Columbia being truly devoted to asking the tough questions and really challenging Ahmadinejad, but everything Bollinger's said suggests that he really wants to take Ahmadinejad to the mat. With that goal in mind, posing questions via notecards can only help.

LateNite writing for LateNite Theater

Okay, so one of the things I've always wanted to do at Columbia is submit a one-act play to LateNite theater. LateNite puts on a show of short student-written plays every semester. Sometimes they're good, sometimes they're... not so good, but I always really enjoy the show. It's just fun and low-key.

So like I was saying, I've always wanted to submit something, so a few days ago I decided I was going to do it this semester. Then I realized that submissions were due tonight at midnight (that is, about 20 minutes ago). I went for it anyway, wrote the whole thing today and finished at roughly midnight. I don't know if it's great, but I think it's a pretty cool thing to do. Projects with time constraints are fun cause they force you to just DO something.

So yeah, my play is called Closure, and if you wanna read the play, here it is in PDF format. Let me know what you think.

(Hah, that was a joke. I know you're all way too wimpy to comment. Seriously, wtf? Charlie started his new blog and within 12 hours had two comments. Step it up, guys.)

Daily Doodle

Here's the header from yesterday's Heidegger notes. I never really know what we're going to be talking about, so it's just done by day.


Is this going to be a daily feature? Well, it sure is easier than actually writing something.

Safe and Sound

I dunno about you all, but nothing makes me feel safer than hearing a weird whirring noise and not realizing for 10 minutes that yes, it is a fire alarm, not just construction, and that yes, I probably should leave my room.

Go Columbia fire safety!

Ahmadinejad: The Reckoning

So a year later, Ahmadinejad is actually coming to Columbia. If you wanna buy tickets, here's a link.

I've already written a post about this topic, but I do think it's funny how this year the protests seem to be, well, nonexistent. With any luck, it'll stay that way and we'll actually get to hear him talk. It should be a really fascinating talk.

(On a unrelated note, how have I never need a Columbia label in this blog? Or one for politics? And yet I have "making fun of study abroad kids"? WTF, me?)

UPDATE: Wow, I didn't even mean to, but it seems I used the exact same picture as The Bwog. Great minds think alike?

Double Doodle!

More doodles from History of Philosophy.



For what it's worth, I think I'm gonna leave the note parts in next time... I feel they add something.

A Little Slow (and not just in terms of my diction)

I'm at Eleven Madison, confirming reservations for Saturday night, and one of the guests doesn't pick up. (This happens frequently.) I leave a message, but I've already done a ton of them tonight, so it's not one of my A-game voicemails. I hang up the phone and think to myself, "wow, I really phoned that one in."

Only 5 minutes later do I realize how ridiculous a thought that is. I should put it on my app when I apply for a job as punologist for the next Mario Party game.

More Fun in Class!

Some of my latest doodles, this time from my Heidegger seminar.


(Yes, that is the Rocketeer flying in the corner. Or maybe Iron Man?)

I <3 Vocoders (even fake ones)!

So I could have been doing homework today, but instead I spent the day working on a song I'm recording. It's coming along nicely, but it isn't quite finished yet.

While I was working on the song, I discovered a nifty vocal effect. Okay, so I didn't really discover it, but I discovered a way to produce a cool sound that you'll probably recognize from certain OC scenes/SNL skits. Anyway, I decided I had to use it to do something, and here's what I came up with.

Vocoder Love.

We're Number 1!

I did it! I am officially the first entry in Google for Shake Shack Spider-man. My co-worker Viviana was unimpressed since that's probably not a particularly popular search term, but whatever. As someone whose name has been co-opted by both a famous rock musician and a well-known journalist (not to mention a photographer and a voice actor(?!)), I'm just happy that I'm the first to show up for anything.

It does make one wonder, though...

What if everyone--well, anyone with a web presence--secretly has one slightly random search topic that they're the first entry for and they've just never happened to search for that one specific thing? Try it, oh loyal but silent readers (I know you exist... yes, I'm talking to you, Lizzie.)! Try it and let me know if you find anything. I figure I can milk this whole thing for at least one more post if you do, right?

Bad Apple

For a company that is generally so consistantly right, Apple sure has been making a lot of missteps recently.

The first I noticed was with iLife '08. In addition to updating Garageband and iPhoto (both of which are MUCH better, by the way), they also launched a heavily-hyped completely overhauled iMovie... which was uniformly hated. I can sort of understand what they were going for. The program effortlessly syncs up with Youtube; combine that with the Macbook's built in iSight and you've got the videoblogging tool for the masses. Never mind that all the advanced functionality that iMovie HD (that's what the old version was called) is gone, because what's really important is that you can upload to Youtube with one click.

The second blunder came this week. In his Keynote address unveiling the wholly-retooled iPod line, Steve Jobs announced that the iPhone was dropping in price to $399. That's a $200 price cut if you're bad at math. Obviously, this sort of thing happens all the time in the tech industry. Prices are always dropping as the next new thing comes along. But the iPhone's only been out a few months now and pretty much everyone who purchased one in the first wave is, understandably, feeling scammed.

The nice thing about Apple, though, is that you can still count on them to own up to their mistakes and make things right. Anyone who gets a copy of iLife '08 can download a copy of iMovie HD and you can actually have both versions of iMovie on your computer without any problem. On the iPhone front, Jobs put an open letter on the front page of the Apple site apologizing and letting current iPhone owners know that they'll soon be getting $100 credit with Apple. It's a canny business move--maybe it'll go toward one of those nifty new iPod nanos--but it's also just being legit. You gotta respect that.

I don't know why I felt the need to rant about this since anyone who cares probably already knows all about it. I guess I was just shocked to see Apple screw up so flagrantly and twice in as many months. It makes me a little concerned about a company that has always impressed me. Let's hope they go back to doing that.

Class Notes, Day 1 (Or FUN WITH MY SCANNER!)

Whoa!

Apparently my last post has brought me ever closer to a position as the foremost authority on the topic of the Shake Shack and Spider-man as they relate to one another. That is to say, I'm now number 3 on Google if you search for Shake Shack Spider-man.

This post is in no way an attempt to move myself up to number one. I swear.

Spider-man Shake Shack: The Reckoning

So I know it's been over a week since my last post, and specifically over a week since I said that I'd post a picture of Spider-man at the Shake Shack, but never let it be said that I do not deliver when I make a promise.
(Click the image for full-size)


EDIT: Here's a picture of the real thing for comparison purposes. (The cup is also dead-on identical, but I couldn't find a good picture of that.)


I heard they bought several issues over at the Shack after I told them about it. And by I heard I really mean that my manager friends over there told me.

Another interesting thing is that the shack says "Master Shack" on it, which I can only assume is a reference to Master Shake from Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

(As a semi-related note, astute readers may notice I did not use the summer tag on this post. That's because I'm now back at school, which is why my scanner is set up, which is how I'm able to bring you this image. Word.)