'It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt .'

The latest outrage-of-the-week revolves around Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visiting New York for the U.N. assembly. Forgotten was the controversial debate over whether he would visit Ground Zero when everyone chose to focus instead on the decision of Columbia University to invite him as a guest speaker as part of their World Leader Forum series.

Matt Drudge hasn't lead with anything else for about a week now. Michael Reagan told Fox News' Neil Cavuto that Ahmadinejad is a dirty Democrat taking orders from Daily Kos. And over at the National Review and other sites, they're just going wild. Lock the doors, baton down the hatches!

Personally, I think world leaders-- even the ones we don't like-- should be welcome to come and address the United Nations, as is their right. And if they want to see the sights in Manhattan while they're here, that's fine too. I did question the judgement of Columbia in inviting him, though. Inviting someone as a featured speaker is a big statement; it doesn't imply approval, per se, but still sends a dubious message. I probably wouldn't have done it.

However, after seeing President Ahmadinejad's speech to the student body of Columbia yesterday (did you know there are no homosexuals in Iran because they are all executed... it must be true, he said it!), I am glad they brought him to their school.

Mr. Ahmadinejad showed our country the content of his character. And the audience laughed in his face. This is democracy, this is what makes our country so great.

In particular, Columbia President Lee Bollinger's introductory speech illustrates this point. It is unlikely that Mr. Ahmadinejad hears this very often in his own country (protests are abundant there, but as with our leader, they are kept far from his sight) and I doubt he will get it any harder than this at the United Nations. Take a look at the democracy in action that so many conservatives insisted would be a 'propaganda coup' for Iran-



This, of course, occurs at a time of concern between our two nations. Members of our government (ie. the disgusting Joe Lieberman and his neocon allies) are still hoping to start a new war against the foe-of-the-moment. And Iran is working to protect its interest amidst their warring neighbor... an AP report notes that "Iran closed major border crossings with northeastern Iraq on Monday to protest the U.S. detention of an Iranian official the military accused of weapons smuggling." But some context/history is needed.

We've had bad relations with Iran for decades, going back to the '79 hostage crisis. But there was a chance for a renewed relationship after 9/11. The Iranian government condemned the attacks. They even provided assistance in the beginning of the war against the Taliban/al-Qaeda, as we had a mutual enemy. But then, in early 2002, President Bush said Iran was part of his 'axis of evil' and hope of reconciliation fizzled. In 2003, Iran offered a deal to the U.S. to renounce its terror ties and make its nuclear program more transparent, in exchange for some U.S. concessions... but VP Cheney insisted the offer be rejected. So, as anger grew against America, in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and threats of expansion into other countries, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected President. This position is not as all-powerful as people believe, as it's the Supreme Leader of Iran who really controls foreign policy, and a lot of domestic too. And Ahmadinejad's belligerence (and obsession with America over his own country's economy) has now hurt him domestically, as seen by his party's losses in the 2006 council elections.

It's safe to assume that his performance in NY this week didn't help his situation there at all. And I am finding it hard today to be outraged at that result.