Free exchange is not always the answer
Regarding 'Free exchange of ideas' (Monday, Sept. 24, 2007):
I was deeply upset with the dissenting opinion of Matthew Halgren '09, Babur Khwaja '09, Scott Moore '08 and Daniel Rausch '10 and their so-called "dissenting' opinion" and the idiotic platitudes and misstatements it put forth as argument. Firstly, President Ahmadinejad has not only "made statements questioning the historical validity of the Holocaust," but he has denied the Holocaust, gentlemen. He did not question whether or not it merits a monument, but denied it happened. Then he hosted a conference about it. Second, you write the most lukewarm of all statements made to defend 'controversy,' "Interested students at Columbia will learn from hearing what he has to say." What will they learn? That he is a ludicrous figurehead of an ultraconservative Shiite regime? Every word spoken does not have value attached to it, despite what some would have us believe. So-called "intelligent design" proponents use this excuse all the time, "to teach the controversy." There is no controversy with their topic or with Ahmadinejad. They are both wrong for arguing superfluous and discredited points. And what of these "pointed questions." They must have had the Iranian resident quaking in his boots. I admit the questions were sharp and direct, but they were easily dismissed. It is good to expose people and the fallacies they promote, but to the uneducated the only message that gets through is that they spoke. The Ivy League is not the world, and free exchange is not always necessary. Michael van Landingham '08
Many groups protested president, not just one
Regarding 'A little humility' (Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2007):
I was taken aback by Professor Daoud Kuttab's opinion piece, and even more surprised to learn that he is a professor of journalism. I was unaware that protests of Ahmadinejad were "mostly by pro-Israeli elements." Perhaps Kuttab should explain that to the Iraqi veterans with shrapnel wounds courtesy of Ahmadinejad's policies, the women's rights groups, the gay rights groups and scholars and policy makers of all faiths, all of whom were protesting the invitation. Apparently those people were just wasting their time. Furthermore, regarding Kuttab's assertion that we should allow peoples to "determine their own future," perhaps he should ask the people of Cambodia, Bosnia and the Darfur region if that policy can ever have negative consequences. Unless, of course, that is the solution that the professor is looking for in Israel and Palestine. I certainly hope that Kuttab's course is on how to conduct investigative journalism, because if what he is teaching is how to write well-thought-out columns, his students are most likely being poorly instructed. Tim Prugar '06
U. should be consistent in speaker policy
Regarding 'Princetonians: Iranian president wouldn't be welcome' (Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2007):
Acting Dean of the Wilson School Nolan McCarty thought it was inappropriate for Columbia to have invited Aghmadinejad to speak at its World Leaders Forum because the Iranian regime which the president "controls" does not support the "values of free speech." I wish to pose these questions for him: Why in 2004 did President Tilghman accept a lunch invitation by the Beijing municipal government, controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, whose support of the "values of free speech" is also nonexistent? Did Tilghman speak out against the China Central government's suppression of those values at that two-hour "Meet China" show on Chinese TV in 2004, a golden opportunity for her to stand up for those Princeton "values ... that the University is founded on" that McCarty is so proud of? If Mao Zedong were alive today, and were willing to speak at the Wilson School, would McCarty reject that opportunity? I surmise that McCarty might be asked to seek new employment by Tilghman if he were to refuse Mao a podium because of his "values." Columbia President Bollinger, acting too much like a movie prosecutor in a courtroom, was playing to the jury of his well-heeled alumni detractors. I suspect McCarty is playing to his own imaginary jury. Not a very good show, is it? Sin-ming Shaw Former Visiting Lecturer
Read More
$56,000 in debt at graduation is not the financial aid Princeton advertises
Avi CheslerTake my story as an example — despite repeated evidence, both before and after taking out loans, that I would be unable to pay what Princeton asked of me — the University never set a cost that I could truly meet loan-free.
In the Garden State’s service and the service of humanity
Olivia Ragan, Lauren Aung, and Madison LintonIt is important to cultivate in students interest in local and state level change, because it is the most direct way to give back to the New Jersey community that sustains the University.
Why do two-thirds of your summer research wages go to Princeton, anyway?
Isaac BarsoumThe income that students earn from employment is not “miscellaneous.” So Princeton must decide: Does it want its students — all of them, not only those who can afford it — to be able to work on the important research happening at Princeton, or be forced to go home?
The income that students earn from employment is not “miscellaneous.” So Princeton must decide: Does it want its students — all of them, not only those who can afford it — to be able to work on the important research happening at Princeton, or be forced to go home?