Demo against Iranian attacks on gays.11 Aug

You can't criticise Iran! They're enemies of AmeriKKKa, which means they must be nice! Just cos you don't think it's acceptable for the state to imprison and torture people based on the sexual oriententation doesn't mean you have to right to impose your evil BUSH BLAIR killer liar Western imperialist values on an ancient civilisation! What are you some kind of MI6 mole here to cause trouble? (etc etc, ad infinitum).

Radical Activist Network are asking people to protest (in writing, or indeed at this demo) to the Iranian ambassador as anti-imperialists. Please see our website for more details www.radicalactivsist.net/actioniran.shtml

And please, Outrage, Indymedia are not in the habit of taking postings down unless they are racist etc. I'm sure there was just some technical problem or something

The posting was taken down becuase the two were convicted of raping a teenage boy - you have to see the Times or the more mainstream press for that - It looks as if failed politician Thatchell is continuing the media war against Iran.

Peter really needs to stop equating an entire culture with extremists. It is astounding that he and his followers at Outrage! cannot see that islamophobia is as much of an issue as homophobia, and that both are totally unacceptable.

We've had a man killed by a group in Nottingham, mosques attacked and a big increase in racist attacks, and still an article bandying around unacceptable stereotypes is touted around by his indignant colleagues.

Its also about time that Outrage! addressed the issue of the allegations of a 13 year old boy being raped at knifepoint by the two lads who were hanged - in what culture is that deemed acceptable?

Surely issues about moderation should be dealt with via the appropriate list, as per the guidelines, rather than clogging up the newswire?

Link to gay.com and the news release from OutRage! regarding the quetions over the
veracity of it's report from Iran.

This was posted in full earlier this afternoon under this Indymedia story- BUT WAS
AGAIN REMOVED. - so much for freedom of speech on IMC)

 http://uk.gay.com/boards/read.php?f=5&i=14985&t=14985

There is a comprehensive rebuttal of the claims about "rape" on our website. See:

 http://www.outrage.org.uk/pressrelease.asp?ID=303

There is nothing comprehensive about that rebuttal.
If there were, you wouldn't have titled your post "'Rape' claims ***may*** be false."

""Why should we believe the claims of a judicial and political system that is one of the most barbaric in the world and which has a proven record of lying to cover up its crimes against humanity?"

Well, fair enough, so why not believe the word of some gay activist who wasn't at the trial instead?

However, even Peter accepts he can't do that:

""Even so, OutRage! has never said the rape allegations are untrue; only that we think they are unlikely and that we treat them with the skepticism they deserve. We acknowledge there are conflicting reports. It is difficult to be certain about the truth. But on balance we believe the evidence points to the youths being hanged for same-sex relations, rather than rape."

Okay - so Outrage may well be siding with child rapists, but so what?

Heres a somewhat different version of the story by Scott Long:

"I direct the LGBT Rights Program at Human RIghts Watch, and some people may be interested in the facts as far as we've been able to determine them. A long article in Quds, a Farsi daily published in Mashad, describes the case, with a lengthy interview with the father of the 13-year-old apparent victim. The account there is that the case dates back two years, that the boy in question was seized outside a shopping area by two other boys who took him to a deserted area where five other boys were also waiting. (It's not clear what happened to the five other members of what is described as a gang.) He was raped at knifepoint, according to his father's account (which is supported by three passersby who interrupted the act: passersby were attacked with knives and had their cars vandalized).

In cases in Saudi Arabia where the government has claimed that executions for homosexual acts involved pedophilia and/or violence, I've been strongly skeptical. Iran, however, is not a closed society in the same way Saudi is. Civil society and a press comparatively capable of independence would make it difficult for the government to manufacture a story of such detail from whole cloth without fear of contradiction. Some organizations have said they have internal sources indicating this story is false; I'd caution, however, that the National Council of Resistance, political wing of the Mojahedin Khalq Organization or MKO, which has been cited as one source to discredit the press version, is often extremely unreliable in its recounting of internal Iranian events (see also HRW's recent report on abuses by the MKO at  http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/05/18/iran10967.htm).

There is no age of consent for homosexual (or pre-marital heterosexual) acts in Iran, and on the presumption that these acts were consensual there would be a legitimate question about whether sexual conduct between children who are at most 16 and a 13-year-old deserves punishment--much less this draconian punishment, according to international law. The evidence that violence was involved seems strong if not conclusive, however. "

He goes on to condemn the hanging of kids, and quite rightly so - it is wrong to hang kids.

Has Outrage! got a position on 7 older kids taking a younger kid at knifepoint - and forcing him or her to have non-consensual sex? If it did happen - and even Peter admits it might have.

The "refutation" is simply Peter Tatchell expressing his view of the world in a ranty way - and asserting that he knows better than any one else.I love the way he dismisses Paula Ettelbrick's concerns - it's aperfect example of him doing it. You should note however that there are many on the left who agree with her, and not him, on that subject.

 http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/7/22/102249/246/197?mode=alone;showrate=1#197

Sorry - forgot to add it

Amazing! Now people are giving the benefit of the doubt to the Iranian Government - responsible for the killing and jailing of tens of thousands of political disidents, trade unionists, sexual and religious minorities, academics, journalists and women.

The benefit of the doubt goes to a government that has just publically executed two teenagers!

So much activity on Indymedia trying to prove the UK is a "police state" - on the same day that the High Court actually UPHOLDS the right to protest of a political disident - but REAL murdering tyrants get apologia and excuses for killing two children - no matter whose version of events you choose to believe!

When does the death penalty get a free ride on Indymedia? - When the victims are homosexual and the executioners aren't American or British!

"He goes on to condemn the hanging of kids, and quite rightly so - it is wrong to hang kids."

Did you read it? Did you read what Scott Long said?

Can you quote where any "Indy people" say "Good on the nice government of Iran for hanging those kids?"

What are "Indy people"? You use Indy don't you? Does that mean you support the execution of children?

You are wrong on the Haw ruling - they ruled it doesn't apply to him because his protest predates the legislation - it does however apply to me and to Outrage! and the rest of us. We lost another "right" today.

"Has Outrage! got a position on 7 older kids taking a younger kid at knifepoint - and forcing him or her to have non-consensual sex? If it did happen - and even Peter admits it might have."

Well - do you condone a group of 7 older kids holding down a younger kid and raping him or her at knifepoint?

It isn't a difficult question.

"Well - do you condone a group of 7 older kids holding down a younger kid and raping him or her at knifepoint?"

The boys are quoted in the Iranian press as saying before their execution that they didn't realize it was a capital offense and that all the boys do it.

Are we honestly expected to believe that they didn't know that violent rape was a serious crime and also that all the boys do it?

The Washington Blade gave a lot of coverage to Long's argument, but when they got round to talking to actual an Iranian refugee, he testified:-

Some countries that criminalize homosexuality charge the person with rape or molestation. That is often the case in Iran, according to "Dan," an Iranian gay man who was granted asylum in the United States. Dan spoke to the Blade on condition that his full name not be disclosed.

Dan, now 30 and living in the Washington, D.C., area, said he witnessed two public hangings of gay men in Iran. He speculates that Asgari and Marhoni were hanged for consensual sex but the government said otherwise to squash public outrage.

"The Shariah [Muslim] law says the person needs to admit to an act of homosexuality," he said. "Even if you don't admit, they torture you to make you confess."

When Dan came out, Iran's volunteer military that enforces Islamic law came to arrest him, he said. He ran away, and eventually escaped to the United States.

Even if the alleged rape had taken place,there is no justification for the death penalty.

In that situation,there should have been an open trial in accordance with Intl standards
and a (long) jail sentence and re education classes- Much the same as would happen
here. At their ages,they could have still made a positive contribution to their society
later. (That may be an assumption but now they have been denied the possibility).

However,Idon't think the allegation is true- just trumped up to help justify the execution.

Personally, even Peter's suggestions would be tricky to impose and there is the risk
of driving the Iranian Gov to even more extremes. Hoqwever, there still needs to be
greater pressure on Iran to respect human rights and Intl treaties.

I also wouldn't want this incident to help justify any sort of Iraq style US invasion either

To A - Iran is a fascist state, very similar to Nazi Germany where everone who doesn't fit is executed ie, homosexuals and jews etc. You are very stupid if you think Iran is anything other than a basket case country run by religious maniacs.

I'm really fed up (being gay and from a Muslim background myself) when I hear white liberals conflating condemnation of Islamic homophobia with "western imperialism".

The main victims of Islamic homophobia (and misogyny and intolerance for voices of difference and dissent) are OTHER MUSLIMS - so why don't you western liberals get over your self-indulgent imperialist guilt trips and start helping them? And I don't mean by invading Iran for chrissakes (American domination of Iran helped to fan the flames that led to the fundamentalist regime in the first place, and we don't want to repeat that mistake)

Just to nudge you towards a respect for the rights of homosexuals (since all your criticisms rely on a binary Islam vs West ideology - in which you always have to side with the anti western party) that bastard George Bush is also anti gay. Doesn't it disgust you to be in the same camp as him?

I was actually a student in Nottingham, and, whilst acknowledging the need to challenge all forms of repression, raised the subject of how voices of dissent and difference were handled by Muslims at a conference on Islamophobia - particularly around homosexuality. I was told by a Dr Musharraf of the Islamic Centre in Nottingham that Muslims were right to punish homosexuals "very severely". A few weeks later my gay Muslim friend was beaten unconscious by his family as they chanted the name of Allah over him. He ran away, they kidnapped him at knifepoint. I will not go too much more into this, I find it disturbing even remembering it all, suffice to say he was a psychological wreck at the end of it .... . That same week I asked (and was given) a detailed Fatwah (religious edict by a qualified authority) on homosexuality from the London Central Mosque by Sheikh Sharkhawy - he specified death for all homosexuals over the age of 10, and claimed that homosexuals were wrecking society through deliberately spreading AIDS (he metioned nothing of the Catholic churches' culpability in forbidding the use of condoms in developing countries where AIDS is spreading far more than the (admittedly pornographically satiated, gay-friendlier) West - but then religious fundamentalists like the catholic church and the muslims work best when they stick together..

By the way, there are pamphlets openly advocating the legalised murder of homosexuals at the London Central Mosque. If you white liberals are so worried about human rights abuses and persecution of minorities in this country, why not pay the London Central Mosque a visit and request for those leaflets to be removed?

Now my question is: should I as a homosexual actually shed a tear if the muslim guy who was murdered in Nottingham was Dr Musharraf , Sheikh Sharkhawy or one of his ilk? Should a black man cry over the deaths of people who openly support the Stephen Lawrence killers? No - we should not force them to be overly regretful over the deaths of people who wish them dead. But if as is very likely this person who was killed was murdered out of racist motives (racism has been rearing its ugly head as a result of these bombings) then I for one would fully condemn it. In fact, as an obviously Muslim-looking person, who has to use the tube every day, I myself have been the subject of taunts and hateful looks. I have always told such people that they are really misguided in their hatred, and that they should direct it towards Bush and Blair as well as Muslim fundamentalists.

Well this is the very intricate (and decidedly non binary) world in which I and many thousands of gay Muslims live - something that these rather pathetic debates seem incapable of understanding, it makes me very annoyed.......

And no, I do not have verification that the particular hangings of these two poor lads are as has been reported - but I do know that Iranian law prescribes the death penalty for homosexual acts. This is also the case in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. All this is not to say that all Muslims themselve are homophobic (my mother and most of my relatives are certainly not) but the religion (as with all judeo christian type dogmas) certainly is. All major schools of Islamic jurisprudence specify the death penalty for homosexuality, apart from one whose name I forget - it specifies whipping. Appalling. I think that it is right to say that Islam in its modern manifestation is largely crypto fascist. This does not mean that all Muslims are - "hate the sin but love the sinner".

Don't you ever sit up and think what kind of a regime you are so keen to excuse? Would you be so keen to appease regimes which promoted violence and murder of people because of their skin colour, on the justification that it wa a "cultural norm"? On the basis of valuing cultural norms, the whole sorry history of western imperialism, subjugation of whole peoples into slavery and genocide could be excused - its very much a western tradition dontcha know...... Oh, as is ISLAMOPHOBIA

I agree with Scott that the western concept of homosexuality as a "personality type" for want of a better term is sometimes misleading when applied to people outside western countries where labels like "gay" are common and there is a tradition of defining oneself in terms of one's sexual behaviour. In campaigning for the rights of people who engage in same-sex acts (for want of a better expression) in developing countries we need to be careful to understand that they may not self define according to western concepts - no doubt about that. However, some things are changing mainly in large cities amongst the urbanised middle classes - I was in Lahore in Pakistan a few years ago and there did seem to exist clandestine groups who (within their own safe spheres at least) self defined as "gay". This is not intended to reify one self definition over another - it is simply what I observed.

I also agree that gay people (like the western liberals who tend to excuse everything done in the name of Islam) need to get out a bit more and see the wider picture. Recently, I went to a "gay Pride" style event in Brighton and all I saw were tents full of trashy t shirts and fluorescent dildoes. I also saw one man wearing leather trousers with his crotch showing. I suppose bad taste and lack of respect for other people is something one can tolerate, but the complete lack of anything approaching a political awareness was the most striking and objectionable thing about the whole event.

However, I do think it is right to specify where appropriate the gay dimension to human rights. After all, should we deny that there was a racist dimension to the Stephen Lawrence murder or the murder of that other poor black guy in Liverpool recently?

If the gay dimension is not appropriately acknowledged its like denying homophobia exists and that it needs to be challenged - that simply compounds the problem. To me that's as bad as ignoring racism and saying Stephen Lawrence was killed simply because he was just a kid - palpably not true. Let's say it - he was killed because he was BLACK.