The nazi bastard coming to NYC.

[S.A.M.]

Sure:

1) in the US military. if you're openly gay you're kicked out of the military
2) in Iran. if you're openly gay you're arrested and killed by the judiciary

it's basically the same shit, according to Sam.

Hmm do you have evidence of homosexuals in Iran being executed for coming out?

From what I have read, although it is illegal by law (established in 1979, after the overthrow of the Shah), it is not put into practice.

As for the two teenage boys that are bandied around this forum.

In 2005, two Iranian teenagers, Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni, were both sentenced to death for what some human rights groups claimed was "consensual gay sex" while Iranian authorities asserted that the two were part of a criminal gang that raped a thirteen-year-old boy. Again, the government claims were disputed by international organizations and progressive domestic groups. Based on information available at the time, Paula Ettelbrick, executive director of the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission, said "It was not a gay case," taking issue with the Human Rights Campaign’s statement that was quick to condemn the execution as anti-gay. "We would welcome HRC’s involvement in demanding that our government speak out on human rights violations. It was just the wrong case,” she said.[11]

Rights are constrained, but they are in almost all societies in the East, including India (where homosexuality is also illegal by law).

 

[otheadp]

there is plenty. it was mentioned on sci many times.

why are you asking? would that change your mind about anything? or will you excuse /deny it once the evidence is shown to you?

 

[otheadp]

ok. so there are some conflicting evidence, and you choose to endorse the evidence that makes Iran seem less barbaric.

a country that to this day stones women to death over adultery (sometimes hangs -- this has all been going around sci, so i'm sure you're aware of it), hanging gays for consensual sex would not seem bizarre or out of place. so i do believe that in Iran gays are executed by law for having harmless private consensual sex, despite the conflicting evidence (someone is obviously lying).

despite HS being officially illegal in India, a judge will never condone one to death over it. (having a wild mob lynch an HS is another thing though...)

 

[S.A.M.]

there is plenty. it was mentioned on sci many times.

why are you asking? would that change your mind about anything? or will you excuse /deny it once the evidence is shown to you?

But thats what I am asking, I happen to be friendly with an Iranian (atheist) immigrant peace activist so I get the information directly from the horse's mouth. Which helps to avoid all the crap that other people prefer to wade through.

Besides there are nutjobs everywhere:

Meanwhile, Yehuda Levin, a member of the Rabbinical Alliance of America, has come to Israel specifically to prevent the homosexual celebration from taking place. He said a homosexual parade is akin to a parade of "prostitutes promoting prostitution, or adulterers encouraging others to try adultery at least once in their life."

"Israel is the Holy Land, not the homo-land," Levin told WND.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51128

 

[S.A.M.]

ok. so there are some conflicting evidence, and you choose to endorse the evidence that makes Iran seem less barbaric.

a country that to this day stones women to death over adultery (sometimes hangs -- this has all been going around sci, so i'm sure you're aware of it), hanging gays for consensual sex would not seem bizarre or out of place. so i do believe that in Iran gays are executed by law for having harmless private consensual sex, despite the conflicting evidence (someone is obviously lying).

despite HS being officially illegal in India, a judge will never condone one to death over it. (having a wild mob lynch an HS is another thing though...)

There are lots of lynch mobs in India too and some of the advocates even get elected to government. e.g. the leader of the Hindutva organisations that was responsible for the Babri Masjid fiasco, the one who was responsible for the Gujarat massacre.

Picking and choosing some incidents in some parts of a country do not define the culture or ethos of a place.

I have met several Iranians in the course of my peace activities and quite surprisingly, they are very cultured, well educated people. Almost without exception, they all advocate peaceful resolutions to problems, no one supports war. They declare that most Iranians are like them, with only a minority leaning towards religiosity, but even the religious ones have no expansionist dreams. And yet, one sees caricatures designed to inflame, to offend, to humiliate.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

Iran Executes Two Gay Teenagers - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime
The British gay rights group Outrage! has accused Iran of torturing the two into confessing that they had homosexual sex. It believes that the assault ...
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/011583.html


Press Action ::: U.S. Supports Iran in Rejecting Gay Rights ...
According to a report by the French newspaper Le Monde, in 1999 Iran killed ten men for homosexuality by stoning them. In 2000, 16 men were stoned to death. ...
http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/gerard02182006/

2 gay teenagers hung in Iran - The Homosexual Agenda - tribe.net
2 gay teenagers hung in Iran. topic posted Thu, July 28, 2005 - 10:10 AM by .... are executions scheuduled for later this month for two more homosexuals. ...
http://homosexualagenda.tribe.net/thread/d0631cfd-2130-406d-9513-892c3c74c6c9

ILGA | Netherlands stops expulsion homosexual asylum seekers to Iran
The homosexual man had been able to escape Iran in the late nineties. ... He has escaped, unlike his boyfriend who was hung in the late nineties. ...
http://www.ilga.org/news_results.asp?LanguageID=1&FileCategory=9&FileID=684

 

[GeoffP]

Its a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Meaning "Don't tell, unless we ask; in which case, you'll have to die."

Hmm do you have evidence of homosexuals in Iran being executed for coming out?

From what I have read, although it is illegal by law (established in 1979, after the overthrow of the Shah), it is not put into practice.

Yes, with Iran's stirling record on human rights, I'm sure that one is never enforced.

As for the two teenage boys that are bandied around this forum.

Unbelievable. Sam, your capacity to fall for reactionary crap is astounding when it suits your purpose. Sure: they were part of a vicious homosexual rape gang. Even when there are "no homosexuals in Iran".

"There are no gay people in Iran. Oh wait: there are? Well then they must be utterly, utterly evil. Let us demonize them - for the greater good, you understand. For everyone."

What a load of reactionary bigoted bullshit. And the girls who file rape charges against their uncles without the four witnesses? Why, they're sluts! And the homosexuals arrested last month? Israeli spies! And on, and on, as the caravan rolls onward, relentlessly, into the desert of the human soul. Kudos.

Rights are constrained, but they are in almost all societies in the East, including India (where homosexuality is also illegal by law).

Wait: I thought the law was never put into practice? So is it or isn't it?

 

[S.A.M.]

Its an interesting occasion when otheadp shows better reading comprehension than Geoff.

 

[GeoffP]

Or when you show any at all. :shrug:

Any luck tracking down those homosexual rape gangs in Iran, Samwise? Keep me in the loop. Enemies of the state, you know.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

SAM

I have met several Iranians in the course of my peace activities and quite surprisingly, they are very cultured,

You actually admit that they can be cultured? Aren't we condescending, I have heard this kind of statements from the KKK about Blacks, and they are some of the most bigoted ass's around, strange that you should use the same phraseology to describe Iranians, SAM has her nose in the Air, Iranians have culture who da' thunk it.

ps: with 40+ post a day where do you have time for (peace activities?) all you seem to do is BAM, 16 hours a day on the Forum.

 

[S.A.M.]

Or when you show any at all. :shrug:

Any luck tracking down those homosexual rape gangs in Iran, Samwise? Keep me in the loop. Enemies of the state, you know.

I know how you deplore research but you could look up what the International LGBT council said about that case. Or not. Or read and forget about it and only remember the POV that supports your distorted view of Muslims.

Whatever.:shrug:

 

[otheadp]

There are lots of lynch mobs in India too and some of the advocates even get elected to government. e.g. the leader of the Hindutva organisations that was responsible for the Babri Masjid fiasco, the one who was responsible for the Gujarat massacre.

Picking and choosing some incidents in some parts of a country do not define the culture or ethos of a place.

I have met several Iranians in the course of my peace activities and quite surprisingly, they are very cultured, well educated people. Almost without exception, they all advocate peaceful resolutions to problems, no one supports war. They declare that most Iranians are like them, with only a minority leaning towards religiosity, but even the religious ones have no expansionist dreams. And yet, one sees caricatures designed to inflame, to offend, to humiliate.

i'm sure you've met Iranians that are peaceful, and that the majority of them are. that's what i've been saying all along.

but it's not about the "vast majority". it's about who's in control in there.

look, Ahmedidouchebag's nickname among Iranian expatriates is "a monkey"

 

[GeoffP]

I know how you deplore research

That's not what you said when I analyzed your tafsir on Sura 9. In fact, I think it was you that deplored my research. Anyway. Another issue.

but you could look up what the International LGBT council said about that case. Or not.

Or you could even read from your own cite. Don't bother if it's going to wear you out though.

Human Rights Campaign’s statement that was quick to condemn the execution as anti-gay

Gee. I wonder why they said that. Couldn't be two sides to the issue?

Or read and forget about it and only remember the POV that supports your distorted view of Muslims.

-10 for Reading Comprehension. Political islam, not muslims - unless you now think the two can't be separated? I know of some reformers who would beg to differ, if that's ok with you.

You know, you seem to be bending over backwards to avoid criticism of that which you say you're so much against.

Whatever.:shrug:

 

[GeoffP]

i'm sure you've met Iranians that are peaceful, and that the majority of them are. that's what i've been saying all along.

but it's not about the "vast majority". it's about who's in control in there.

look, Ahmedidouchebag's nickname among Iranian expatriates is "a monkey"

Well put.

MSA's position always is that of zero criticism: claiming moderacy, she turns viciously on anyone daring to criticize the negative aspects of political islam. Yet, I daresay she wouldn't think twice about slamming Robertson or Sharpton or Falwell or any of those other idiots. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck and claims to be a moderate...well, it must be a moderate. Not.

 

[S.A.M.]

i'm sure you've met Iranians that are peaceful, and that the majority of them are. that's what i've been saying all along.

but it's not about the "vast majority". it's about who's in control in there.

look, Ahmedidouchebag's nickname among Iranian expatriates is "a monkey"

The reason why a person like Ahmedinejad is in power is because under pressure, people elect the hawks. Why was Khatamis peace proposal rejected ? Why has there been no dialogue with Khatami or Rafsanjhani? You see, when you undermine the liberals, the hawks rise to the top. (We told you the US will never change. Do you want another Western puppet in power? etc). With the loss of political clout that the renewed sanctions brought in 1995 and 1997, the Supreme Council went back to the hawks. And 20 million Iranians who disagreed with that choice did not vote.

But the reformists are working hard to get back what they lost. Do we really need to undermine their efforts, which so far are looking good for the next election? Khameini does not want a US invasion any more than Saddam did, Ahmedinejad will be eliminated in the next round. But if the US rattles its sabre, then he is better bet as a fighter than the secular reformists. Or someone else like him.

And Iranians are not Iraqis. Would you really want a destabilised Iran next door? With the secular reformists shoulder to shoulder with the fundamentalists? Considering that almost all suicide bombers are secularists, it would be a foolish move for Israel (which will get pulled into the fiasco, since they are allies). You don't want Iran in a position where they have nothing left to lose.

And if you think the emigrated Iranians will stand for it either, you haven't met any of them.

 

[GeoffP]

Considering that almost all suicide bombers are secularists, it would be a foolish move for Israel.

Without disagreeing with the rest of the above strangely lucid rant, the bolded text derives from a disconnected study in a geographically distant locale. It has nothing to do with the Middle East.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

The reason why a person like Ahmedinejad is in power is because under pressure, people elect the hawks. Why was Khatamis peace proposal rejected ? Why has there been no dialogue with Khatami or Rafsanjhani? You see, when you undermine the liberals, the hawks rise to the top. (We told you the US will never change. Do you want another Western puppet in power? etc). With the loss of political clout that the renewed sanctions brought in 1995 and 1997, the Supreme Council went back to the hawks. And 20 million Iranians who disagreed with that choice did not vote.

But the reformists are working hard to get back what they lost. Do we really need to undermine their efforts, which so far are looking good for the next election? Khameini does not want a US invasion any more than Saddam did, Ahmedinejad will be eliminated in the next round. But if the US rattles its sabre, then he is better bet as a fighter than the secular reformists. Or someone else like him.

Really? Khatami or Rafsanjhani, degrees of separation, that is all that separates them, a few degrees of separation in how long they wan to take to bring the world under radical Islam. show me any of these who aren't Hawks, just degrees of when they want to eat you.

Kinda like the Nazis and the Jewish Problem, do you want to be the first into the oven, or help and be the last into the oven, either way you end up in the oven, in this case the oven of Radical Islam.

 

[S.A.M.]

Without disagreeing with the rest of the above strangely lucid rant, the bolded text derives from a disconnected study in a geographically distant locale. It has nothing to do with the Middle East.

With all due respect, read the study first and you will discover (and eventually, hopefully remember) that the first suicide bombers in the Middle East were in Iran, during the Iran-Iraq war; notice there aren't all that many there today.

 

[Buffalo Roam]

SAM

Considering that almost all suicide bombers are secularists

The stupidity of that statement is astounding, secularist don't commit suicide bombings, they don't have a belief system to give them the necessary courage to do such a selfless act, wrong as it may be, it takes faith to commit a act of suicide for your fellow man, secularist don't have that faith, and from all of the recording of these suicide bombers why are they all screaming Allah Aqbar!!! at the top of their lungs, and why do they in their video last will and testament praise Allah and talk of Paradise?

Some where there is a recording of a suicide bomber, or pilot, screaming these calls to Allah as they crash or blow them selves up, in the name of God.

 

[GeoffP]

With all due respect, read the study first and you will discover (and eventually, hopefully remember) that the first suicide bombers in the Middle East were in Iran, during the Iran-Iraq war; notice there aren't all that many there today.

Good. Now read the modern news and find out that most of them aren't secular.