“America has NO RIGHT TO ACCUSE IRAN for persecuting gays!”

Don’t be ridiculous, of course we do.  It is against the law here to commit violence against someone for being gay and the vast majority of Americans oppose such violence, even conservative christians.  We as Americans have every right to condemn this violence when we see it, and indeed a DUTY to criticize Iran for it’s state sanctioned public executions of homosexuals.

WARNING: PHOTOS ARE DISTURBING

In America, the STATE does not kill people for being gay. It CITIZENS do.

In America, the STATE used to persecute gays. And would still if REBULICANS and CHRISTIANS had their way!

You think that the photo of a hung young gay man is disturbing? What about a gay man beaten and left to die? What about the many gays murdered in America just for being gay?

Certainly, hacking a man’s head off with a sword is despicable. That does not happen in America. But people are still persecuted and killed in America JUST THE SAME. The method of execution may be different, but gay men die just the same.

America has NO RIGHT TO ACCUSE IRAN for persecuting gays!

Interesting, isn’t it, how people seem to discuss Ahmadinejad’s extremes more than anything else in the blogosphere?

He’s a homophobic anti-semetic terrorist supporting dictator, eh?

Guess what? THAT is the definition of a Christian Conservative!

Taking into account that Christians ONLY support Isreal because the “messaiah” is going to return on their land, and that the definition of ‘terrorism’ is “State sponsored killing of non-military persons and/or infrastrucure,” and that they would gladly turn this country into a Biblical Dictatorsip, Republican Americans are homophobic anti-semetic terrorist supporting dictator wannabes! (Anti-semetic because they actually and truly are anti-all-but-Christians at heart.)

Funny, isn’t it, how many of Ahmadinejad’s critics say things like “he doesn’t answer questions directly.”

Ahmadinejad is, in the manner in which he speaks, just like many U.S. politicians!

What frightens me in this ugly and somewhat shameful episode is the effortless methods with which people can be made be so hateful. I’m referring not to the Iranians but to the Americans. Where does this hatred and anger come from? These folks can’t all have family in Iran. All those sign wavers in front of the UN—are they draining the midnight laptop battery educating themselves about the middle east? I doubt it.

No, Iran wasn’t on anybodies radar until Bush proclaimed it a member of the axis of evil. Since then, it has suited the administration’s agenda to feed the press with arguments positioning Iran as the threat-to-worldpeace-elect.

Now, I’m not trying to defend Iran. It’s the underlying mechanism that I’m interested in: The gov’t tells the press who we’re going to hate. The press dutifully and uncritically disseminates the information, adding some juicy visuals and out-of-context sound bites to pump up the drama, and presto—the masses are marching.

Why isn’t anyone asking questions like these?—
Is iran any more oppressive to women or gays than Saudi Arabia?
Is Iran a greater threat to world peace than Pakistan?
Is Iran any more fanatical in the pursuit of its interests than Israel?

So why are these countries our allies, and Iran a sworn enemy?

Where are the nation’s critics? Are we really this helpless as a nation against this mechanism of propaganda?

I forgot to mention that the “two young gay teens being executed in Iran” were convicted of raping a 13 year old boy. Harsh punishment certainly but the spin that has been put on this incident - that they were being executed for simply being gay - is an example of the demonization of Iran that is promulgated by MEMRI, the Pipes family and the neo-cons whose only object is to eliminate a strong critic of Israel.

David L. Wylie

I would be very interested to see some evidence for the assertion that “over 4000 gay men, women, and children have been executed by this Islamic government”

Amnesty International reports:

“In the period 1990 to present day, Iran executed 24 minors and the U.S. executed 19.”
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-children-sta ts-eng

They also mention that here hasn’t been an execution of an apostate in 12 years.

When several U.S. think tanks are dedicated to cheerleading an attack on Iran, many facts get distorted. They amplify articles from sites like iranfocus which is run by MEK, a group dedicated to seizing power in Iran. I recently traced one of their reports of a “gay execution” and found that they had neglected to mention that the “victim” had murdered a child after raping him.
I suggest those interested in getting a more accurate picture of Iranian society start with the facts and statistics provided by impartial organisations and work from there.
Few people know, for example, that Iran graduates more women from their Universities than men, it allows trans-gender operations under its’ national health scheme. How does that align with the commonly accepted image of an “Islamofascist” State?

The interviewer threw the homosexual question in the mix because there is no answer which will please everybody, it was a red herring question and served to confuse and cloud the real issues. 

I would question any reporting on this matter from any jewish owned news organization as it seems they are all bias and prejudice.

I think Ahmadenijad is just a republican from another country.

Most media accounts say the crowd at Columbia responded with laughtere at the Iranian Leader’s Proclamation that there are ‘no homosexuals in his country’.  It’s been estimated that since the exile of the Shah, over 4000 gay men, women, and children have been executed by this Islamic government.  I don’t think that’s funny. If you see the humor in his remarks, take a look at these images of two young gay teens being executed in Iran.  Perhaps your laughter will turn to weeping.  WARNING:  PHOTOS ARE DISTURBING-

http://www.gaysofla.com/content/view/94/1/

Brtewerstroupe wrote:

“The position Ahmadinejad holds is roughly equivalent to a U.S. Vice President. “

Actually, it is more akin to a Prime Minister in countries which also have a President or or other figure as constitutional head of state. The US Vice President has almost no official authority at all, managerial or otherwise. The VP can cast a deciding vote in the Senate in the event of a Senate deadlock and can certify the official vote count of the electoral college. Other than that he is just an advisor to the President and the guy on standby to take over the Presidency in case the Pres dies. Dick(head) Cheney is very politically powerful and influential in the Whitehouse, but officially he has almost no authority over anything.

Ahmadinejad on the other hand, is the head of the civil government in Iran and is generally running the country on a day-to-day basis, though he is constitutionality subordinate to the spiritual Supreme Leader who has final say in any matter where he choses to intervene. He is responsible for choosing cabinet ministers, submitting the national budget to parliament, and has the power to fire anyone in the civil government, which gives him significant executive authority. In the US, the only person with these authorities is the President, who is the boss of virtually all federal employees, save a small minority who work for Congress or the Supreme Court.

As long as he has the political backing of Khamenai, Ahmadinejad is the de facto leader of Iran.

If there was any doubt that a handful of influential people control the American MSM, that doubt has been pushed aside the last few days.

Both the CBS “60 Minutes” interview with Ahmadinejad, that was haughty and arrogant in its tone and the not so veiled accusations against Ahmadinejad that were plastered across the New York papers had the air of asking someone if they had stopped beating their wife.

The American MSM has been foaming at the mouth the last couple of days over the visit, barely able to contain itself as it falls all over itself, with each form of media trying to one-up the other in painting Ahmadinejad as some sort of evil incarnate.

Strangely enough, they never mention the part of Ahmadinejad’s speech at Columbia where he brought up the plight of the constantly under siege Palestinians, who Israel has mandated that they will be the ones to pay for all past transgressions, real or perceived, against Israel.

And for Columbia’s president to cite the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR) research as a basis to attack Ahmadinejad is beyond absurd.
In the past, the CFR has devoted pages to right-wing religious nut cases like Pat Robertson and the still at large and wanted by Chile war criminal, Henry Kissinger.

Whatever one thinks of Ahmadinejad, they have to give the Iranian president high marks for keeping his cool and not going ballistic by not taking the bait, which was offered numerous times the last few days in the form of leading and loaded questions and hostile interviewers.

Do you truly think that the so-called “leader” of the free world, president GW Bush, would have ben able to maintain his composure under such conditions?

Despot, Dictator, Tyrant?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad has virtually no power in Iran. He is a figurehead, a representative, and a fairly intelligent one I might add.

Quite unlike our own president who also has virtually no power. But unlike Iran’s president, Bush really thinks he makes all the decisions.
Ahmadenijad knows better.

Aside from our two respective presidents, the only real factor worthy of consideration in this whole comedy of errors is the state of the two nations and their people.

We know beyond a shadow of a doubt those two factors are monumentally unimportant in the grand scheme of “Democratic Capitalist Imperialism.” So what really has to be at issue here is how low will the “empire” go, to “liberate” Iran and bring them democracy clothed in imperialism and delivered on the platter of a million dead civilians?

If we end up at war with Iran, the guaranteed chaos will be exactly what we deserve. Saddam had no WMD. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. Thinking people all over the world knew that before our media began hyping us with manufactured lies to sell an unnecessary war. And we really learned that lesson well, didn’t we ... cause here we are again listening to a new version of the same lies. Only this time the product is Iran. And this time the bad guy is Ahmadenijad, and this time everybody’s taking every pile of bile that’s being dumped on them with some resistance, right?

Wrong.

Right on cue on the floor of the House this morning, they line up to chime in their two cents worth condemning Iran. It’s like watching a class room of kids, jumping up, excitedly waiving, “Oh, pick me ... pretty please ... pick me!”

Our dim-bulb congress is once again taking their marching orders from the White House twins, “Moron and Maniac.” So either congress truly is populated by dim-bulbs, the dumbest of the dumb ... or they badly want to be members of the empire!

And that makes them beyond dumb. That makes them amoral.

What price is anyone willing to pay, so they can ride on the coat-tails of the emperor?

Self respect? Dignity? Truth? Perhaps their very lives. [Naw ... they’ll run and hide first]

Certainly dignity and self respect. We saw that yesterday when Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, made an absolute fool of himself. Like an ignorant baby throwing his cereal bowl. Or a bad host inviting a neighbor in for coffee, so he can scald him, pouring it in his lap. I’m sure Bollinger thought he was impressing someone. Certainly he makes one wonder about the qualifications required to become a University president. Obviously intelligence and respectful demeanor aren’t required.

Ahmadenijad on the other hand took the deliberate insults with a measure of dignity. Had the situation been reversed, I suspect our president would have reacted with a temper tantrum followed by storming off the stage. Of course we will never know, because our president hasn’t got the courage to walk on to the stage of opposition.

Meanwhile, start rehearsing your tearful salutations [Glycerin in the eyes will produce tears on demand. Works for our leaders]

Stand tall in self-righteousness. Show support for the wives and husbands and children and parents of our military who will be sent to fight in Iran.

Loyal patriots to the Empire who pay the ultimate price. Human sacrifice for Capitalism, God and Empire.

yea, hooray ...

Oh, almost forgot ... keep shopping!

brewerstroupe (#102493), you may be “a simple Kiwi” (Is that anything like “a plain country lawyer?"); but you DO have a way with metaphor:  “Could it be the American people are swallowing the same stale dish of deceit that lead them into so many past and ongoing disaters [SIC]?” I was immediately reminded of the ANNIE HALL joke about the exchange between two old ladies at their hotel in the Catskills:

“The food here is terrible.”

“Yes, and the portions are so small.”

Though I think Bush is in many ways a better person than the Iranian president, I can’t help but think what Bush sounds like to others when he travels overseas and gives speeches about how America will succeed in Iraq and how the US is doing great things around the globe. 

As an example, what about Bush speaking about freedom and equality when he wants a ban on same sex marriage and supports those people who say if you are an atheist you really are not an American.  What Bush is saying is that he agrees with freedom and life style choice for those people he thinks deserve it...how is that any different from what the president of Iraq does?

What about Israel?  The US government (and not necessarily the people) explicitly supports their terrorism and other vicious activity toward the Palestinians (who are no angels and I do not support their own violent acts either).

On Iraq?  When he give a speech from the safe confines of a US base far from Baghdad, the Iraqi’s that bother to listen to him are probably seething in disgust about his complete lack of intimate knowledge of their daily lives and struggles…

This hypocrisy and lying I’m sure sounds pretty much the same to the Iranians, Iraqis, the rest of the world, and Bush would be laughed at while he was spouting such nonsense if he were allowed to speak to an audience that isn’t highly selected and open to anyone with a few dollars…

I think the president of Iran is a tyrant and this comment should not be construed as a support for him...I just think it useful to look at our own leaders from the perspective of people from other nations and see what they see...are they right?  I don’t know, but at least we can have a dialogue without resorting to ad hominem attacks right out of the gate…

Eisenhower greeted Krushchev warmly, and rode up Pennsylvania Avenue with him in an open motor car, right after Krushchev had sent tanks into Hungary. The Soviet history of concentration camps and political repression was well known.

Nixon went to China and toasted Mao Zedong, right after the Cultural Revolution, in which thousands (if not millions) were summarily killed or sent to re-education camps. Mao was, arguably, the greatest mass murderer in history, yet we opened talks with him.

Lee Bollinger’s opening tirade against an invited guest was intolerably rude. Ahmadi-Nejad is little more than a figurehead President in Iran’s very complex governmental system. He certainly is not a “petty and cruel dictator.” He does not even act as commander of the Iranian armed forces.

Do I like Ahmadi-Nejad? Not particularly; he is about what you would expect from dozens of Middle Eastern politicians. But he has tried, on many occasions, to open talks with the US. Why not take him at his word and see if we can do something constructive, rather than just rant on and on about his being “the next Hitler”? (Another absolutely absurd comparison).

Bollinger should have just given a brief, polite introduction, and let Ahmadi-Nejad speak for himself.

What an appalling lot American academics have become.
That the Dean of an eminent University did not familiarize himself with the structure of Iran’s government before spewing ignorance and vitriol is either gross incompetence or something worse.
The position Ahmadinejad holds is roughly equivalent to a U.S. Vice President. Thanks to the CIA’s machinations in toppling Mossadeq and supporting the bizarre Shah, the radicals insisted that Khomeni assume the ultimate authority in Iran, incidentally, against Khomeni’s own wishes. Thus the President is a managerial role with little real power over policy.
To call such a man a “petty and cruel dictator” is not just rude, it is preposterous.
Americans have been made so cynical by the antics of their own leaders that when a simple man of profound faith comes among them they can only look for guile.

I have had a strong interest in Iran and Ahmadinejad for several years. There is a consistency about what he has said that bespeaks sincerity, albeit through the medium of a devout believer in his religion.
He probably believes what he said about Homosexuals. There are plenty of fundys down South in your country who have similar beliefs.

As to conditions in his country, I detect that many posters here are getting their information from neo-con think tanks who rely primarily on iranfocus. I have spent countless hours tracking the horrendous stories they trumpet. None have proved to be accurate. But then what would you expect from an organization dubbed both “terrorist” and supported by the CIA?

I am just a simple Kiwi with no particular axe to grind but I notice that the U.S. has a habit of demonizing the leaders of those countries it wishes to rape. Could it be the American people are swallowing the same stale dish of deceit that lead them into so many past and ongoing disaters?

Personally, to BELIEVE Ahmadenijad is to BELIEVE Bush.  I see no difference, well...Ahmadenijad does, at least APPEAR more educated.  Every single one of his talking points were tailor made for what he may believe is the “left” position.  Bush AND Ahmadenijad want to be crowned with international “talking head” status. But this is not about that.

It is about who we are and what we do as a collective group called Americans.  No, I do not ascertain that Americans want to bomb Iran.  Nor do I ascertain that Americans buy into everything Ahmadenijad says.  This would be akin to Iranians sucking up everything Bush says.  I DO believe that the Iranian people as a whole have no issue with the American people as a whole.  And I also believe the American people as a whole have no issue with the Iranian people as a whole.  That said, what some of our and their A-HOLE leaders spew is certainly another matter.  All of which need to be disseminated and logically addressed.

thomasbillis. that was a cute one. did you know, if you resister with TD you don’t have to type those creepy letters and your post goes up instantly?

Boggs, if you think the oppression of woman in Iran is untrue, you are utterly ignorant of the subject.  It is Iranian woman who have fled the country who tell the true story. Why not tell them that their personal horror stories are just propaganda. Maybe they can relieve you of some of your ignorance.

If you think Iran has never attacked another country using state-sponsored terrorism, you are hopelessly ignorant of history.

I cannot believe how rude and undignified these “Educated Professionals” and neocon shills can be to a visiting foreign head of state, like him or not. 

Obviously http://www.GIYUS.org and the Internet megaphone were out in mass these past few days in NY.

You can’t pick up a newspaper, magazine or watch a TV channel (even Real Time with Bill Maher) where Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad is being compared to the devil himself.

Ahmadenijad is also questioning 9/11 which affect me as an American, I could care less about his issue with the Holocaust as they have occured thoughout history against many peoples.

This article explains alot about the media and why they would be predisposed to act the way they have: http://www.rense.com/general78/mdot.htm

I forgot to mention that Ahmadinejab like myself, think it is rather retarded and backwards for gov’t to worry about having nuclear bombs.
A country with so many nuclear bombs as the U.S. how can they be concerned about humanity? They just don’t go together. We are more concerned with how to destroy humanity. Therefore Ahmadinejab is far ahead of the U.S in concern for the people of the world.

Frank, I was referring to the facts that Ahmadinejab gave us about the history of our U.S. terrorizing the country of Iran for the past 40 or so years.
Iran itself has not attacked another country and has had no inclination to do so. Except, in our gov’t and media propaganda.
The propaganda we spew about the “oppression” of the Iranian women which is totally untrue and people who have traveled there know this as false.
He also made the point that we would also become involved if our neighbors were attacked! He has far more right to be involved in Iraq then we do!
I never considered Ahmadinejab as being charismatic....? I guess you do!
If you continue to follow the neo-cons you will learn the world is flat.

Whatever the politics involved, at least President Ahmadenijad LOOKS like a REAL PERSON in contrast with the cookie-cutter CLONES in suits, with their perfect hairdos, plastic smiles and phony handshakes, that infest most leaderships in other nations.

I find it hillarious that in America, the homophobes acknowledge the existence of millions of people with “alternative lifestyles” and rail against them, while in Iran, the homophones are in such deep denial they don’t even recognize that up to 10% of their population is non-heterosexual (an acknowledged scientifically-based standard ratio world wide). OF COURSE, there are gays and lesbians in Iran but since they’ll be executed if found out, it’s my guess they’ve found ways to meet their needs without marching down Main Street in ridiculous outfits (or not) on Pride Day.

Of all the serious issues facing this planet, the sexual orientation of a tiny percentage of the population seems to me to be the LEAST IMPORTANT OF THEM ALL.

But, whadda I know?

Having read the entire 60 MINUTES transcript

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/21/60minutes/ma in3286690.shtml

I came away with the impression that Ahmadenijad was reading from the same script he used for his Pelley interview (meaning that we can thank CBS NEWS for helping him to rehearse it)!

Boggs wrote:

“He also brought out all the errors that somehow get into our media as truth but is no more then propaganda.”

Interesting. Are you referring to the Jewish holocaust? Do you consider that to be merely propaganda?  Or are you referring to his denial of homosexuals existing in Iran, even though their public executions have been videotaped?

Many of history’s worst despots have been charismatic and eloquent public speakers. I wonder if you would have been impressed with them also.

I listened to his dialogue and responses at the Press Club and then to his dialogue and responses at the Columbia U.
and I have to say I was impressed with his ability to overlook the rudeness of our country spokespersons, and continue with an intelligent and diplomatic give and take.
He put the intelligence of our own leader to shame.
He also brought out all the errors that somehow get into our media as truth but is no more then propaganda.

I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that morons can rise to the top anywhere you go in the world today.