It’s time that MSNBC fired Norah O'Donnell as a correspondent and anchor and rehire her as a republican pundit. Norah "interviewed" three guests on MSNBC today regarding Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia University: Bill Richardson, Ervand Abrahamian, and Pat Buchanan. She was desperately trying to get at least one of her guests to agree with her republican talking points, that it was an abomination that Ahmadinejad was given a forum at Columbia University, but no one would, as hard as she might try. By the third interview inquisition, Norah tried to change the description of Pat Buchanan's job in order to achieve her goal. She did nothing but quote republican figures in order to browbeat her guests.
I transcribed two of the three interviews (I lost Bill Richardson in the buffer, but Bill Richardson essentially said the same things as Ervand Abrahamian and Pat Buchanan, after being asked the same questions as they were later asked.)
Here is a transcript that I did of two interviews. The words in Italics denote Norah really emphasizing the points she wanted to make, so as to say, "Listen to my inflection and I’m sure you’ll change your mind."
Note how Norah used the word but quite often in her questioning... A word not supposed to be used by a questioner. A question should be a question; not a confrontation, as all pundits resort to. But means: On the contrary, contrary to expectation, with the exception that, and often used after a negative.
When first quoting McConnell, the word "microphone" was used. Later, Norah, to make her point better, changed it to "megaphone."
I was very impressed with all three guests’ comments on this subject. I agreed with them all. I was happy that none of them placated Norah, but I wish they would have confronted her intention, yet I understand it was more germane for them to express the importance of allowing this man to speak. I was especially impressed with Pat Buchanan’s take on the issue, especially coming from him.
I was going to make some comments at the end so as not to interrupt the flow of the dialogue, but given the time it took me to do my first diary, I'm exhausted, so I'll leave the comments to those who wish to participate in a dialogue, although I did editorialize a bit throughout this in order to represent the flavor of the interviews.
NORAH O'DONNELL: Iran's president is on his way back to the United Nations right now after his appearance at New York's Columbia University. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took issue with the very blistering introduction he was given by the University president who called him a petty and cruel dictator.
(Video of Ahmadinejad played)
Interview with Ervand Abrahamian
NORAH O'DONNELL: Ervand Abrahamian is a professor of history at Baruch College in New York and Professor Abrahamian is an Iranian American and the author of Inventing the Axis of Evil. Professor, thank you so much for joining us.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Thank you for inviting me.
NORAH O'DONNELL: Let me ask you: As an academic, do you believe that this is free speech or hate speech?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, no, I mean I think universities are places where different types of speech are to be aired, and even if we don't like what is being said, that's where we'll hear and listen and discuss, and I think Columbia was right to invite Ahmadinejad to speak there. I find –
NORAH O'DONNELL: But this is -- but this is a dictator who the minority leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, says: "We've essentially been handing a megalomaniac a microphone. His country is a state sponsor of terror, he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons, he has called for the destruction of Israel, he denies that the Holocaust ever happened, he called it a myth, and then he has been accused by our U.S. military officials of aiding and abetting those forces that are killing our troops in Iraq." Why would we give this man a platform?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I think all the quotations, you had the long quotation, actually sums up the rhetoric. The rhetoric has its own sort of impetus life, and all those statements have an element of truth, but they're blown out of proportion, and then the result is there's no ability to have a dialogue. And, unfortunately, this meeting at Columbia should have been really addressed on the relationship between United States and Iran rather than the Holocaust and other issues. I think Bollinger did a very –
NORAH O'DONNELL: But the –
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: -- a disservice to hold the meeting to focus on Ahmadinejad as a person and basically to turn the discussion, rather, from the United States/Iranian danger -- we're really in a dangerous situation of a war in the next few months -- and debating all about issues, about
Holocaust and other issues, which may be important historically, but they don't address what is really the concern right now -- (Norah interrupts.)
NORAH O'DONNELL: Professor, I understand you see the importance of a dialogue, but this is a leader who continues to resist efforts by U.S. and Europeans to end uranium enrichment, (said condescendingly) and he's been lying about the fact about what he's been using this uranium enrichment for. He says he wants to do it for peaceful purposes. Our intelligence analysts and others suggest it's not for peaceful purposes.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I beg to differ, actually. The United Nations Atomic Energy have been really dealing with this. ElBaradei, who's the director, has, in fact, has a very different perspective on this issue, and he has said that they have explored this. They have not found Iran dealing with nuclear weaponry. The question, I think, which is really a concern in Washington -- it should be a concern -- is putting safeguards to prevent Iran developing a peaceful program into a weapons program. Those possibilities of safeguard are there. ElBaradei has, in fact, suggested that this is the way to go about it –
NORAH O'DONNELL: (Wants to interrupt.)
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: -- unfortunately, in Washington, this route has not been taken.
NORAH O'DONNELL: Okay. (Wants to interrupt.)
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: In 2003, in fact, the Iranian government proposed cross the board grand bargain which would discuss these issues.
NORAH O'DONNELL: All right. (Wants to interrupt.)
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: For reasons that are not clear to me, Washington refused to negotiate on these issues, so I -- you know, there -- (The professor positions his body with his hand and one finger to his head, as if to want to delve further into his point)
NORAH O'DONNELL: Well, Professor, this is going to be a big topic at the United Nations, and we certainly appreciate you joining us here today. Thank you.
(The Professor did not acknowledge her. I don't blame him.)
Next Story: Lasts one minute about the New Center
commemorates 50 years since Little Rock Nine.
Next Story: Lasts four minutes: "Pop stars custody battle." "Britney charged with hit and run after not reporting accident." Interview with bodyguard.
Interview with Pat Buchanan
NORAH O'DONNELL: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's controversial appearance at Columbia University went off today without major incident. Inside, the crowd mostly listened quietly and politely to the hard-line leader, even clapping at times. Outside, angry protesters lined the streets, calling Ahmadinejad a terrorist.
Pat Buchanan is an MSNBC analyst who joins us now. Pat, good to see you. I'm sure you heard part of Ahmadinejad's comments and, of course, the introduction (Pat laughs) by the president of Columbia University, Lee Bollinger, who's under enormous fire, so he took the opportunity essentially to super# slam him in front of everybody, as all the networks carried this, accusing him of being a petty and cruel dictator. Is that enough for the Columbia University president?
PAT BUCHANAN: Well, I think the Columbia University president, Mr. Bollinger, is really -- with that remarks, that introduction was directed to his donor base, which is --
NORAH O'DONNELL: Yeah.
PAT BUCHANAN: -- frankly, at Columbia is terribly unhappy Ahmadinejad is there. But I thought Ahmadinejad -- first, I think, Norah, this is riveting television, riveting television. I certainly commend MSNBC for carrying the whole thing from beginning to end. I watched --
NORAH O'DONNELL: And explain why you say that, Pat.
PAT BUCHANAN: Well, because –
NORAH O'DONNELL: Why is it riveting?
PAT BUCHANAN: It is riveting because this is -- I mean we are at a point very close to a war with Iran, and the fact we gave this individual this time to air his views in his own words, which he did, and then to have the questions which came, which were pointed and direct, and him to respond to them, I think it was just -- it was -- I think it was just healthy for those of us, certainly, who would like to see a war avoided. I think Ahmadinejad did himself enormous good; some good in the United States, but in the Middle East, a tremendous amount of good by the arguments he made.
NORAH O'DONNELL: Yeah, but given that, Pat -- I don't know if you saw the comments by Mitch McConnell, the republican leader in the Senate –
PAT BUCHANAN: (Pat shakes head in a dismissive manner, as if to say, "Big deal.")
NORAH O'DONNELL: -- who said, "We are giving a megalomaniac (shakes head to emphasize even more) a megaphone."
PAT BUCHANAN: Well, look, I think the American people can judge that. With due respect to Mitch McConnell and to Mr. Bollinger, we're the American people. I would like to see the man myself as MSNBC showed him and not have Mitch tell me I can't hear the guy because he's a megalomaniac.
NORAH O'DONNELL: Uh-huh. (Acknowledging but disapproving)
PAT BUCHANAN: I don't think he came off as a megalomaniac; he came off as a very articulate, powerful, and effective spokesman for Iran and for his point of view, and he answered some very tough questions –
NORAH O'DONNELL: Uh-huh. Pat, this is –
PAT BUCHANAN: -- some of them unsuccessfully.
NORAH O'DONNELL: As you know, this has sparked a huge debate.
PAT BUCHANAN: Uh-huh.
NORAH O'DONNELL: We noted this op-ed (said sharply) in the online version of the National Review by two Columbia University undergraduates, and they wrote: (shows text graphic) "The issue here is not free speech. That
is a red herring. We have heard no one argue against free speech. The issue is values... By its invitation, Columbia has chosen to give Ahmadinejad a valuable political gift that he does not deserve and that he will use to further repress his people and threaten his neighbors. It is shameful to receive him here as an official guest."
What about that, that this is an issue of values --
PAT BUCHANAN: (Pat is squirming in his seat, seemingly frustrated)
NORAH O'DONNELL: -- that this is an Ivy League institution, and to bestow upon someone like Ahmadinejad this gift , that that's wrong? (Frustrated, and said with admonishment)
PAT BUCHANAN: That's nonsense. Look, in 1959 I stood across the street as Nikita Khrushchev, the Gauleiter of Ukraine, who murdered people in the tens of thousands, who sent his tanks to crush the Hungarian rebellion in blood, he's in an open convertible with Dwight Eisenhower, who puts him up at Blair House, and then brings him over to the White House, and then sends him on a ten-day guided tour of the United States, which was an enormous boost for him. He did it because we've got to talk to these people if we're not going to have war with them. (Pat sort of yelled that last sentence)
Now let me tell you this: I will say Ahmadinejad made some powerful points. One is, Look, Israel and India have got nuclear weapons, they didn't sign the IAEA, they don't let inspectors in. He said, "There's no evidence we have diverted any uranium to any kind of weapons project; the IAEA says so, and we are -- you know, and all we're doing is going for 5 percent."
Is that true or is that not true? It's a very valid point.
He mentioned that, you know, terrorists are inside Iran. The Mujahideen-e-Khalq -- which we believe blew up the Iranian Parliament -- are they being used now by us. We used to designate them a terrorist organization. He says they're operating in their country. Is that true?
NORAH O'DONNELL: But, Pat, I must say, if you were running for president again -- smirk -- I don't think you'd be making this argument, would you? I mean essentially defending the right for him to speak here? (Very strictly said): You see every other republican candidate from Romney, who has a new radio ad out today, everybody's saying (now shaking head negatively) this guy should not have had this right.
PAT BUCHANAN: I'm not running for president; I'm not in politics. (Smiling) I'm an analyst and a journalist –
NORAH O'DONNELL: (Laughing out loud, really out loud) Pat, you don't have to remind me that.
PAT BUCHANAN: -- and as an analyst and a journalist, (still smiling and now emphasizing with hands) I'm telling you he was very effective.
NORAH O'DONNELL: You don't have to remind me that. I'm just saying to you that politically speaking, you wouldn't be making this argument, would you, not if you were running for president on the republican field?
PAT BUCHANAN: I'll tell you that –
NORAH O'DONNELL: Am I right?
PAT BUCHANAN: No. Here's what I would be saying: I would say let's hear this fellow out and -- let's hear what he's got to say. I would say this, too: Look, I'm not afraid to debate him if I were president. I'm not afraid to have him to the White House. I wouldn't invite him; I would agree with Richardson. I wouldn't invite him, but if he came to the UN and said, "I would like to meet the President, I would certainly send the Secretary of State up to talk to him."
NORAH O'DONNELL: All right. Pat Buchanan, it's always a pleasure.
PAT BUCHANAN: Okay. Take it easy. (Both laughing, and camera starts to fade) Analyst.
NORAH O'DONNELL: (Off camera) Absolutely.