Mahmoud says: No Homosexuals in Iran
Wonder what the lesbian Sally Kohn was thinking as she was busy listening to one that terrorist-loving tyrant whom she found almost cuddly enough “to turn [her] straight” when he proclaimed that in his land, they “don’t have homosexuals like in your country.”
At least this response did not earn the dictator much applause (as he reportedly got for other comments). Instead, Rich Lowry reports, the audience responded with “lots of derisive laughter.”
Pajamas has asked me to write on this. I’ll let you know when that piece is up. Until then, feel free to weigh in with your own comments on Mahmoud’s claim about homosexuals in his land. The piece is now up on Pajamas!.
UPDATE: Maybe Mahmoud doesn’t think they have gays in his land because his government has been busy executing them.
-Dan (GayPatriotWest)
********
GP Update: Here are some of the gays that never existed in Iran, according to its President.
When I heard Ahmadinejad’s statement that “there are no gays in Iran”, it immediately made me fear for the gays that are there. Hitler systematically erased Jews in Germany, both literally and by erasing their existence in public records and history books.
Any gay or lesbian American that still denies Islamists are targeting gays, and instead thinks President Bush is the enemy, demonstrates the true definition of a “self-loathing homosexual.”
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
67 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Well, finally we know where god wants all the Evangelicals to move now: Iran.
Any Evangelicals looking for a one-way ticket to your promised land, I’m sure we’ll be happy to take up a collection!
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 5:33 pm - September 24, 2007
Proof positive that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice…at least in Iran, where any other “choice” is likely to get you hung.
(sarcasm…in case I’m not obvious enough)
Comment by iamnot — September 24, 2007 @ 5:45 pm - September 24, 2007
GP, great point. What are Sally Kohn – and any other gays that would make excuses for Columbia hosting Ahmadinejad – if not the proverbial, genuine “self-loathing homosexuals”?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 24, 2007 @ 6:14 pm - September 24, 2007
***Well, finally we know where god wants all the Evangelicals to move now: Iran.
Any Evangelicals looking for a one-way ticket to your promised land, I’m sure we’ll be happy to take up a collection!***
Hey Scoot, can you site me the last time an Evangelical put a homosexual to death, just for being a homosexual? Also, was it sponsored by the United States government? I know you can’t be intellectually honest in your answers, so consider the questions as rhetorical. You prove, once again, just how sophomoric you libs are.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 6:23 pm - September 24, 2007
Guys. I can hate Iran (and Bush-buddy SAUDI ARABIA) and at the same time recognize that Bush’s policies and statements have actually made his position stronger (e.g., his Axis of Evil speech undercut the Iranian moderates)
Comment by Tom in Houston — September 24, 2007 @ 6:30 pm - September 24, 2007
Tom, I’m trying to tie your comment to anything under discussion in this thread – or for that matter, to anything anyone has ever said on this blog – and I can’t.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 24, 2007 @ 6:32 pm - September 24, 2007
#6. Last paragraph in the posting ‘Any gay or lesbian American that still denies Islamists are targeting gays, and instead thinks President Bush is the enemy, demonstrates the true definition of a ”self-loathing homosexual.”
The purpose of the post is to stand against those who imply that people who don’t agree Bush support all those that disagree with him.
Comment by Tom in Houston — September 24, 2007 @ 6:43 pm - September 24, 2007
I love it! Just pretend that a whole group of people don’t exist. His comments on the Holocaust were even more precious. The guy is a total bafoon that is even losing support among the right wing people in his own country. It’s classic dictator power BS: as you lose control of popularity you bang the drums about some external entity you have to rally around to fight.
I still don’t an epidemic of gays and lesbians denying that the Islamists target gays. I iddn’t realize that diametrically disagreeing with Bush, his policies and their implementation automatically means one is denying that the Islamists are targeting gays. Sounds like a a false dichotomy to me.
Comment by Mr. Moderate — September 24, 2007 @ 6:48 pm - September 24, 2007
Well, technically, the two guys in the pic don’t exist anymore. And note the hanging method: it’s not the “long drop” used in the west that results in quick death. It’s “dangle and strangle” – good for a few minutes of agony.
Tom, I don’t think reasonable people equate disagreement with Bush to being an Islamofascist sympathizer.
What I think is self-evident, however, is that quite a few Bush opponents (and lots of lefties that just hate the west because of capitalism, consumerism, or whatever) enable our enemies out of hatred for all things western.
Comment by Robert — September 24, 2007 @ 6:59 pm - September 24, 2007
***The purpose of the post is to stand against those who imply that people who don’t agree Bush support all those that disagree with him.***
You know what, Tom, that was well said, and I can live with it. Though I disagree with you on Bush (HA – imagine a lesbian having something to say about Bush!! 😉 ), your above statement is “ok” by me. To me, it shows you may actually be one of those rare liberals, who understands what a dirtbag Ahmadinejad is, regardless of your opinion regarding President Bush. If I’ve interpreted it wrong, please correct me.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 6:59 pm - September 24, 2007
Tom, you’re all over the map, sorry.
1) Bruce makes a point that if any gays deny that Islamists target gays – or prefer to concentrate more on their own hatred of President Bush instead – they are self-loathing.
2) That in no way implies Bush is beyond criticism. But, you make the point at #5 anyway, that Bush isn’t beyond criticism. OK. And that in your opinion, he has helped Ahmadinejad (which I disagree with). Whatever.
3) Then, at #7, you imply that Bruce’s earlier point was that “those who imply that people who don’t agree [with[ Bush support all those that disagree with him.” I can’t see that it was.
But whatever, dude. Brave “dissent” there 😉
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — September 24, 2007 @ 7:02 pm - September 24, 2007
To me, it shows you may actually be one of those rare liberals, who understands what a dirtbag Ahmadinejad is
Those sorts of liberals aren’t as rare as you imagine…
Comment by Mr. Moderate — September 24, 2007 @ 7:03 pm - September 24, 2007
This is from my 2nd favorite lesbian on the planet, http://tammybruce.com/. Her intellectual honesty is what I respect the most. Not bad on the eyes, either 😉 .
Bush Approves of Ahmadinejad at Columbia
He has now completely and officially jumped the shark. Will someone just send him a case of Jack Daniels so he can finish his complete and utter moral collapse?
Ahmadinejad Speaks of Love, Kindess, Beauty and God in Speech to National Press Club (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297823,00.html)
Earlier Monday, President Bush said that while he’s “not sure” he would have offered the head of a state sponsor of terror a platform from which to outline his agenda, he thinks it’s OK that Columbia University did invite Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak.
“This is a place of high learning and if the president (of Columbia) thinks it’s a good idea to have the leader from Iran come and talk to the students as an educational experience, I guess it’s OK with me,” Bush told FOX News in an interview. “The problem is Ahmadinejad uses these platforms to advance his agenda, which I suspect in this case … He doesn’t want America to know his true intentions.”
Effing genius. The embodiment of strong, definitive leadership, especially when speaking about the thug who runs one of the countries in the Axis of Evil.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 7:07 pm - September 24, 2007
You say that like it’s an either / or proposition.
And, just to correct the hyperbole, it’s more of an accurate statement to say that I think that Bush’s policies are doing more help than harm to the extremist Islamicist movement. Many on the left (and a few on the right, based on some freeper posts lately) may view Bush as “the enemy,” but in general that’s a right-wing oversimplification of a complex analysis of his policies.
Comment by torrentprime — September 24, 2007 @ 7:47 pm - September 24, 2007
“can you site me the last time an Evangelical put a homosexual to death, just for being a homosexual?”
Why, that’s in them there bible of theirs! Stoning homosexuals is “supposed” to be their punishment. Of course they don’t do this behavior because we all know the bible isn’t the moral compass of ANYTHING in our society.
Don’t be so disingenuous and dishonest. We all know the disdain that Evangelicals have for homosexuals and the campaign lodged against them through this discriminatory and inane “man/woman” marriage crap, along with the decades of bigotry spewed through their religion.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 7:48 pm - September 24, 2007
Nice attempt at “bait & switch”, Scooter… but you didn’t answer the question.
You did however, make a moral equivalence argument between Christianity and Islamic fundamentalism.
When was the last time a Christian terrorist beheaded a civilian? Or flew a plane into a building? Or conducted gay hangings in the public square?
Just askin…..
Comment by GayPatriot — September 24, 2007 @ 7:52 pm - September 24, 2007
Then lets move beyond oversimplification of Bush from “Hitler” and “Nazi” or “Moron” and actually provide an alternative model that doesn’t tell Americans to understand murderers and why their evil is understandable. Stop allowing yourselves to appear to not care about our enemies’ crimes all in an effort to be perpetually contrarian to your fellow citizens’ concerns.
Comment by VinceTN — September 24, 2007 @ 7:53 pm - September 24, 2007
Shall we bring up the years of taunting gays and inciting violence towards gays that the religious in our world have engaged in; wow, just after AIDS became the “gay” disease; Matthew Shepherd; shall we go on? do we need to?
You think “gay hate crime” isn’t happening because you don’t hear about it? Give us all a break.
There’s been enough hate speech lobbed at the gay community to last a millennia and it’s ALL been from the religious and those that they indoctrinate and brainwash into thinking “gay” is something jesus even cared about.
You just don’t like the fact that religious behavior isn’t too far from Iran’s insanity.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 7:54 pm - September 24, 2007
LesbianNeoCon: Hope this link helps with your search on evangelicals killing gays.
Man says murder was ‘God’s work’
I mean, I don’t have a copy of his baptism/born-again ceremony handy, but he’s certainly justifying his actions with Christianity.
Comment by torrentprime — September 24, 2007 @ 7:55 pm - September 24, 2007
There’s no “bait & switch” – the comparison between the rhetoric and hate speech that A-mad-jihad gave today and the religious of our world spew towards gays is blunt and to the point!
I have nothing to hide in my post, I don’t need to – the obvious is there for everyone – perhaps you haven’t read your bible or visited the many religious websites that dictate “homosexuals” as “bad”.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 7:57 pm - September 24, 2007
“moral equivalence argument between Christianity and Islamic fundamentalism”
This would pre-suppose that either religion or ANY religion is moral – they are not. There’s nothing moral about religion, in fact, religion is probably the greatest propagator of hate speech than any other thought process that permeates our world.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 8:01 pm - September 24, 2007
@16: So the new bar for hatred is “not flying into buildings”? And as long as you don’t hang gays in the public square, you’re on the right side of things? Do you realize you’re claiming that as long as you’re better than the most evil of the evil, the craziest of the crazy, you’re all right? Ye gods: by that metric, turning firehoses on blacks must be kinda ok, since it’s not “as bad” as a beheading or a lynching!
Your “when was the last time a Christian did what Islamicists do” rhetoric accomplishes nothing. It doesn’t justify the sickening and disgusting lies that Christian activists preach every day in this country, and it doesn’t wipe away the social costs to gays that have to live in the resultant society. Every time a Christian spreads the “gays want sexual access to our children” and “the homo agenda’s #1 goal is to destroy the family and Christianity,” they are spreading hate and fear about us. Just because the people making those statements are not wielding swords does not make them any less evil.
Comment by torrentprime — September 24, 2007 @ 8:02 pm - September 24, 2007
Good point torrentprime; additionally, we won’t even allow our military to be open for those that are gay – we silence them or we kick them out of the service – does that sound like acceptance? No, in deed it is not.
Evangelicals think they are on the moral high ground when in fact they are similar in the fundamentalist rhetoric. Any time a religion incites hatred, bigotry and/or violence has no morals – period!
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 8:07 pm - September 24, 2007
Any time a religion incites hatred, bigotry and/or violence has no morals – period!
What do you call it when it is done by liberals like you?
Comment by GayPatriot — September 24, 2007 @ 8:12 pm - September 24, 2007
LOL! I’m not a liberal! LOL!
You think, discriminatorily so, that just because I hold a view different than yours I couldn’t possibly be Conservative!
How hilarious!
How ignorant.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 8:17 pm - September 24, 2007
Scoot – Now show me where violence against gays, which I never said didn’t happen, was/is sponsored by our government, as law. No surprise, you are missing the point!
And this is especially amusing:
***Good point torrentprime; additionally, we won’t even allow our military to be open for those that are gay – we silence them or we kick them out of the service – does that sound like acceptance? No, in deed it is not.***
Yeah, your beloved (democrat hypocrite) Bill Clinton is to thank for that (“Don’t ask, don’t tell”). You’re making this too easy, boot-scootie.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 8:23 pm - September 24, 2007
My degree is in Behavioral Sciences with an Associates in Substance Abuse Counseling. My Graduate work has been in Human Resource Management. I have worked with the Police Department in Arizona within the Crisis Management Division, counseling in Marriage and Family Therapy, Homeless, Runaway Youth, Substance Abuse and Addictions, and various workshops, lectures and classes on Family Systems, Communication and Growth.
That’s not the resume of a Liberal? How hilarious!
Now… can we get back to the subject of the dictator of Iran being the enemy of gays and not the American government?
Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — September 24, 2007 @ 8:27 pm - September 24, 2007
***You just don’t like the fact that religious behavior isn’t too far from Iran’s insanity.***
You have made some stunningly idiotic statements here, but this is a glaring example of what a truly uniformed lib, with his head firmly shoved up his anal cavity, looks like. You poor thing.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 8:27 pm - September 24, 2007
Scootie, no way you’re a Conservative. You not intellectually honest or morally balanced enough. I mean, have you actually read anything you’ve written here? You’re a whiney queen, with a victim complex.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 8:30 pm - September 24, 2007
LOL! I know you are attempting to offend me, but clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about.
So hilarious!
You want to attack me personally, which is fine, it just shows that you have nothing to offer in the debate/discussion – ad hominem is apparently your bully tactic – fortunately it does nothing for you except to show you as the cowards you both are – congrats for revealing yourselves.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 8:33 pm - September 24, 2007
Actually Lesbia, you’re the victim. You understand nothing of Accountability and Responsibility, rooted in freedom of choice.
If you think you’re tough enough to have the debate, then bring it; but you won’t because a weak-minded person only attacks the person and has nothing to offer the debate.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 8:37 pm - September 24, 2007
What a cop-out. You haven’t answered any questions posed, and you have feebly attempted to turn things around. I know you need to consult with the leftist talking points manual, so I’ll let it slide this time.
So, answer this simple question: Where has our government sponsored, as law, violence against, or put to death, gays, just for being gay? . And sorry, the idea of banning “gay marriage” doesn’t count in this discussion. It’s hardly a life or death issue.
Ok, you can avoid and deflect now.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 8:44 pm - September 24, 2007
“Now… can we get back to the subject of the dictator of Iran being the enemy of gays and not the American government?”
Liberal? The dictator of Iran is NOT the enemy of the American Government? See how your mind has walked off the map?
To enlighten you, A-mad-jihad IS an enemy of the American Government. He sponsors terror and violence, rooted in his religious ideology. You need to get a clue about why we’re in this noble conflict.
BTW – apparently you were very ignoble in printing my resume, which I don’t care that you did, but never spoke about my conservative views regarding “Gorebal Warming”, endorsement of capitalism, freedom of choice in life, etc. It only supported your narrow view of life to suggest that I am a liberal because you have no argument worth presenting.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 8:45 pm - September 24, 2007
HAHAHA!! Scoot, you have missed it again!! He wasn’t saying the Iranian government is not the enemy of the American government. He is saying the American government is not the enemy of gays, but that the Iranian gov IS the enemy of gays. You’re wildly amusing!! Too bad you wasted so much money on that college education (leftist indoctrination), because you can’t even read!!
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 8:50 pm - September 24, 2007
If your claim to be a Conservative is true, you have brought something to the table the likes of something I’ve never seen in a Conservative. Stunning, truly stunning.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 8:52 pm - September 24, 2007
“So, answer this simple question: Where has our government sponsored, as law, violence against, or put to death, gays, just for being gay? . And sorry, the idea of banning “gay marriage” doesn’t count in this discussion. It’s hardly a life or death issue.”
You miss the point entirely – not surprising though given your lack of intellect.
The point is that RELIGION in ANY FORM is a forum for and the incitement of hatred, bigotry and discrimination. Iran’s law is a RELIGIOUS LAW – are you really this stupid?
The fact that we, as a nation, are not willing to stop the discrimination against gays in any form, i.e. the recent hate speech legislation, gay marriage, man/woman only marriage, don’t ask – don’t tell, etc. continues to endorse hatred, bigotry and discrimination towards gays in our society. Why is that? Because Evangelicals have it in their head that their “god” doesn’t want this behavior being endorsed – that’s about as close to a law as you can get without it crossing the line of church/state separation. Isn’t that what Falwell said the reason for our 9/11 attacks were partly for? Pat Robertson? Others? This isn’t incitement toward hatred, bigotry and discrimination. What planet do you live on?
You want a free pass because there isn’t a “law” telling us it’s okay to kill gays or incite violence toward them. You think this sets you up as being on the higher ground. It doesn’t. If you’re a religious person, which I venture to guess you are, then you are part of the problem with your mythological thinking and superstitions of prayer.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 9:01 pm - September 24, 2007
Lesbia, then he has a very unlettered post because his semantics lead it nowhere else. Truly education in any form was lost on you, as well.
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 9:03 pm - September 24, 2007
[Deleted due to violation of community terms of conduct.]
Comment by Scooter — September 24, 2007 @ 9:07 pm - September 24, 2007
“Lesbia”? Hmm, I like that! If I use it, do I have to pay you a royalty?
Ok, lemme spell it out – IRAN’S GOVERNMENT SPONSORS VIOLENCE AND DEATH SENTENCES AGAINST GAYS, JUST FOR BEING GAY. OUR GOVERNMENT DOESN’T. All that crap about how the Evangelicals hate us, and want to impose whatever on us, is nothing but silly insipid whining.
And Bruce was pretty clear. But hey, I’m just a dumb dyke, who took a few college courses, here and there, so what do I know?
I’m not religious, btw. Not even a Christain. I just know the difference between how Iran treats gays, as opposed to how you perceive our government does.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 9:18 pm - September 24, 2007
The point is that RELIGION in ANY FORM is a forum for and the incitement of hatred, bigotry and discrimination.
And you are an antireligious bigot, as you make obvious in that statement.
Furthermore, yours and torrentprime’s attempts to circumvent the First Amendment and ban/punish peoples’ religious beliefs and freedom to express them, under the guise of “hate crimes”, plus your spewing of accusations and hate against religious people, only proves what complete and utter hypocrites you are.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — September 24, 2007 @ 9:43 pm - September 24, 2007
YOU are not even worth existing in RELIGION – don’t you get that?
Nope.
Because my religion sure doesn’t say so.
Instead of using homosexuality as an excuse, Scooter, just take responsibility and accountability, and admit that you are an antireligious bigot.
Because it certainly isn’t a requirement of being gay that you be one.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — September 24, 2007 @ 9:49 pm - September 24, 2007
What he said was:
““In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country…”
Iran doesn’t have gays and lesbians who openly admit their orientation, like in our country. So he can actually, honestly claim to have told the truth. He is a consumate politician and totalitarian, well versed in how to play with words. Noam Chomsky has nothing on Ahmadinejad.
My point is, you have to watch this forked tongued, mass-murdering slimeball. Read all of what he says carefully, parse it, and you will discover even more brutality, murder, and opression openly and freely admitted to. Bush’s crimes don’t even begin to match Ahmadinejad’s in scope, number of innocents killed, brutality, suffering and especially not barbarity.
Comment by AC — September 24, 2007 @ 9:55 pm - September 24, 2007
I agree with torrentprime. It’s not an either or proposition. I think Ahmadinejad is a joke. I also think President Bush is one too. That doesn’t mean there is any moral equivalence between the two. I just don’t support either man’s political agenda.
As for Iranian society… Yes, Iran is hell on earth for gays. But the fact that Iran executes gays doesn’t make the Republicans immune from criticism for their inability to see sexual orientation as a protected class.
Gay groups must criticize both.
Comment by Chase — September 24, 2007 @ 9:57 pm - September 24, 2007
Chase, no one is saying the Republicans are immune from criticism. One could also say the way democrats pander to gay voters, and then slap us in the face with “don’t ask, don’t tell” crap, is somewhat hypocritical, as well. Some believe there is no difference between what goes on here, and what goes on in a place like Iran (or any ISLAMIC nation). Christianity is not above reproach in how it views gays, but to compare it to a religion that not only abhors gays, but murders them, as part of their ISLAMIC law (which runs their government), is irresponsible.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 10:21 pm - September 24, 2007
***…their inability to see sexual orientation as a protected class…***
See, I consider myself as part of no group or “class”. That’s Marxism 101, which, by nature, is un-American. I am American. Not Jewish-American. Not gay-American. Just good ol’ American. I don’t need protection from anything except from the enemies of America. Some outside the country, some within. Too many within.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 24, 2007 @ 10:24 pm - September 24, 2007
That’s admirable, but others do. Other people will discriminate because you’re a woman or because you’re a lesbian or because of your nationality. Ignoring it won’t make it go away. Ignoring it won’t offer you any protection. That’s why legal protection is important.
In the United States, we’ve moved beyond homosexuality as a criminal issue (see: Lawrence v. Texas). But it’s still very much a legal issue in terms of civil law. That is our current battle.
With the Republicans it’s a matter of changing minds. With the Democrats its a matter of pushing words into actions. Unfortunately, both areas currently need work.
Comment by Chase — September 24, 2007 @ 11:30 pm - September 24, 2007
Hey Chase!
Gay groups must criticize both.
So when are we going to see that? HRC won’t do it. Surely they won’t speak ill of a guy who bashes Bush right along with them.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 24, 2007 @ 11:41 pm - September 24, 2007
Scooty-puff Jr. sez:
Why, that’s in them there bible of theirs! Stoning homosexuals is “supposed” to be their punishment.
Can’t find it in my Bible (NIV). Chapter and verse please?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 24, 2007 @ 11:42 pm - September 24, 2007
#42:
Well, Bush is hardly a piker when it comes to the numBer of innocents he’s responsible for killing. And many of those commenting here cheered it all on. “Shock and Awe” you know.
Comment by Ian S — September 25, 2007 @ 12:01 am - September 25, 2007
Versus you and your fellow do-nothings, Ian?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — September 25, 2007 @ 12:31 am - September 25, 2007
#50
Meanwhile, those who died at the hands of terrorists might have been less under lord BJ, but the fact that he (or any other lib) didn’t give a shit is even more chilling. But that’s just me.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 25, 2007 @ 6:27 am - September 25, 2007
Say Chase,
Do you suppose we’ll see gay liberals criticize Iran before or after they apologize and make corrections for Jessie Macbeth, Beauchamp etc.????
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 25, 2007 @ 7:16 am - September 25, 2007
Remember that Ahmadinejad’s evil is not limited to executing and otherwise oppressing gays- this is a man who denies that the Holocaust ever happened, then in the next breath says that’s really a shame and proposes finishing the job. He’s president of a nation that has been a major state sponsor of terrorism for nearly 30 years, and is currently waging a proxy war against us by sending various armaments to insurgents in Iraq. It’s therefore shocking to me that so many on the left, including homosexuals who ‘wouldn’t exist’ in Iran, cannot bring themself to condemn him unless they condemn Bush in the same breath. Bush is obviously not the most gay-friendly guy around, but equating his relatively minor offenses against us with Ahmadinejad’s policy of hanging us by the neck until dead is simply disingenous and politically blind. Don’t excuse Bush’s anti-gay policies by any means- but at least be willing to admit that in this particular situation, he’s not the biggest threat. Not even close.
Comment by Sense — September 25, 2007 @ 9:01 am - September 25, 2007
Scoots, Matthew Shepard was killed by crackheads, not Christian evangelicals.
Your stupidity is truly epic.
Comment by V the K — September 25, 2007 @ 9:05 am - September 25, 2007
tammybruce.com does it again! She says it like no other. Sure, Gay Patriot rocks, but Tammy’s a chick!! 😉
To see the photo of what she is referring to, you must go to her website (http://tammybruce.com/). I can’t attach here.
Two gay men being executed in Iran. For being gay. Picture courtesy of Homan, the Iranian Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual and Transgender Organization. Yeah,a blog from those people who don’t exist.
Most bloggers did an excellent job calling attention to and criticizing Ahmadinejad’s ridiculous statement about gays in Iran during yesterday’s speech at Columbia. At a certain point one does not want to be come an echo chamber, so I’ve waited until today to make a few points.
I’m still simply stunned by the absurdity of Ahmadinejad in New York yesterday and the finally hearing rejection and disgust from the Columbia crowd–but only when homosexuals are mentioned. Yes, of course monkey boy’s comments were absurd about the gays in Iran, but they pale in comparison to his comments about wiping Israel off the map. The fact that it took a revealing, but not surprising, comment about gays to enrage the Columbia crowd illustrates how deep and blinding malignant narcissism truly is.
Believe me, Teh Gheys are not at the top of the list for annihilation by Islamists. Oh, we’re on that list (certainly below the Joooooz!), so it is quite the moral abdication to passively, or even approvingly, listen to other equally fanatical and dangerous comments by the same madman.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 25, 2007 @ 3:17 pm - September 25, 2007
#53, Sense, your name should be “Common Sense”. Great stuff!
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 25, 2007 @ 4:40 pm - September 25, 2007
Well, it took me about five seconds to find this on the HRC website (which I’ve visited only a couple times previously, so it was hardly tough to find):
Sounds like a good start to me, since I’ll have to take you at face value in your assertions that HRC has not previously criticized Ahmadinejad. What do you guys think?
The full text is here: http://www.hrc.org/news/7720.htm
Comment by Chase — September 25, 2007 @ 6:46 pm - September 25, 2007
Something I wrote a while back on Iraq the Model:
SisterRosetta :
Sit down, I think I love you
Omar, why are the democrats doing this?
I’ll tell you exactly why. They don’t care.
Black churches in America will jump up and down every Sunday about freedom. But don’t believe them. They don’t really mean it. They only care about freedom for themselves. They don’t care about the Blacks in Sudan who are being enslaved. If they did, they wouldn’t be trying to stop George W. Bush at every turn. The only reason little to nothing is being done in Darfur is because the only superpower in the world has been shackled almost beyond repair.
Oh, and don’t believe the leadership of the gay/lesbian community in America either. Again, they only care about the progress of their own agenda here in America. They don’t care about the young Iranian gay men being put to death by the mullahs. They can’t even let the thought of that intrude upon the relative safety they have here at home. God forbid.
And the feminists here in America. What a joke?! What feminists? I didn’t hear their outcry when young Iranian women were being hung or stoned to death for adultery. Or when the Russian or Chinese governments repatriate women and their children to torture or worse in Iranian and North Korean gulags.
And where is the outcry against the genital mutilation of little girls or the attempted export of this barbarism to Western cultures?
There are a few small voices in America trying to get this message out. But the major media oulets in this country are so diametrically opposed to George W. Bush and his mission that they stifle any coverage that might awaken the American people to what they are really up against.
Recently, some of us have witnessed the screams of an Iranian woman resisting arrest, crying for help as she was being pushed into the back seat of a police car. And we laughed in amusement at the warnings being given to Iranian barbers about Western style haicuts for men or about the plucking of eyebrows.
But believe me there are much more sinister and evil acts being perpretrated in Iraq and Iran and in North Korea. And probably elsewhere too.
Do you honestly think things would be any different if the United Nations (i.e. the United States) intervened in Darfur? The terrorists would flock to Sudan just as they have to Iraq.
So, most of the democrats in the United States stopped believing what they were saying a long time ago. And at the top of their agenda has been the delegitimization of George W. Bush so that they could start winning elections again.
Believe me, Omar. They don’t care about you or the Iraqi people or the oppressed anywhere in the world.
So we have to stop them.
A Lieberman-Loving Democrat
Sister Rosetta
May 1, 2007 02:52 PM
Comment by Sister Rosetta — September 25, 2007 @ 7:40 pm - September 25, 2007
I hope liberal anti-war homosexuals that hate Bush will recognize that Mr. Mahmoud Imforjihad is a suitable eventual target prior to his acquisition of nukes, which he denies he seeks as well as denies Iran has any Gays.
Comment by SNURDLY — September 25, 2007 @ 9:10 pm - September 25, 2007
Sister Rosetta, “marry” me!! 😉 Outstanding stuff.
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — September 25, 2007 @ 9:16 pm - September 25, 2007
Who are these gays denying that there is a serious threat to gay people in the middle east? They certainly aren’t reading the gay press that I read. There have been many many stories about these issues in the East Coast gay newspapers.
Anyone who denies that is an idiot or a fool.
Comment by Houndentenor — September 26, 2007 @ 2:26 pm - September 26, 2007
He’s a hate monger and a bad dresser. And what’s with that smile? Certainly its the smile of a happy, kept man.
Go back Home, Mahmoud.
Found this post that addresses the Mahmoud Gay issue and it’s HILARIOUS! THought I’d share…
http://lauriekendrick.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/mahmoud-in-the-city/
Comment by Anne Crews — September 26, 2007 @ 6:31 pm - September 26, 2007
I’ve a question,
Every time when someone tries to use Fred Phelps or, gods help us, Pat Robertson as an example of Christians, can I get a free pass on lumping all gay men with NAMBLA? It’s just as stupid.
Comment by The Livewire — September 26, 2007 @ 6:35 pm - September 26, 2007
Every time when someone tries to use Fred Phelps or, gods help us, Pat Robertson as an example of Christians, can I get a free pass on lumping all gay men with NAMBLA? It’s just as stupid.
Seems fair to me.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — September 27, 2007 @ 6:14 am - September 27, 2007
I’m sure there are Republicans as well as conservatives who would love to be be able to say one day that there are no gays in America. That’s why they are working their anti-gay asses off.
I think many use Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, James Dobson is because there aren’t many famous or powerful Christians who oppose their viewpoints or who don’t get as much attention from the media.
Bush is hardly a champion of gays. Did he bother to counteract Ahmaddinejad’s comment at all on gays? He is all over it when christians are victimized in Iran, but hardly says a peep when gays are executed. Can’t blame democrats for that can we?
Comment by Elais — September 30, 2007 @ 10:03 pm - September 30, 2007
Elais, what Sean already said.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 1, 2007 @ 4:14 pm - October 1, 2007
http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=FBC2142D-4A38-4B4C-9C0B-4B0AA4CF3822
Comment by LesbianNeoCon — October 2, 2007 @ 12:09 pm - October 2, 2007