Iran's persecution of gay community revealed

[jimmie]

The lifestyles of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in Iran are comprehensively and systematically denied by the Islamic regime, which exposes them to horrific punishment, bullying and risk of suicide, a study has found.

The first detailed report on Iran's LGBT community has found that its members live under social and state repression, with some being persecuted, forced into exile or even sentenced to death.

The study was conducted by Small Media, a non-profit group based in London. Researchers led by Bronwen Robertson, director of operations, gathered first-hand testimonies from hundreds of LGBT Iranians using face to face interviews or through a secret online forum.

"The bastions of the Islamic Republic of Iran fully realise that an established (albeit secretive) LGBT community exists beneath the folds of fundamentalism in [the country]," says the report. "[But] figuratively speaking, the Iranian government is doing its utmost to sweep the community under a densely woven Persian rug."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/17/iran-persecution-gay-community-revealed

[jimmie]

1. Disgusting nt

[leveymg]

2. Revealed? The neocons have been pounding away at this same message for decades.

Shouldn't be news to anyone. I don't know which is more disgusting, those who persecute gays, or those who would use this as an excuse to propagandize and incite war. Both are criminal in my book.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Not at nearly the same level

Being openly gay in the Bible Belt and you might have a harder time finding getting a marriage license. Being openly gay in Iran will get you stoned to death.

The hardcore fundies in this country are on the political margins. Even so, no group with any standing has called for stoning them in the US. Not true in muslim nations or regions where the sharia is the highest law.

While any kind of discrimination is wrong, there are several orders of magnitude of difference here. Lumping them together is easy and convenient, but is intellectually dishonest.

[leveymg]

4. Right, but wrong. War and advocating war against a group of people is the ultimate persecution.

Israel's threatening the actual preemptive use of nuclear weapons is several orders of magnitude worse. Unfortunately, those who advocate war against Iran aren't on the margins in that society or of this one.

[jimmie]

5. When did Israel threaten war?

And actually Iran has endlessly threatened "a world without israel" and to destroy the "zionist entity". Show us all how israel has threatened to use nukes?

And quite frankly after all the repeated threats against israel by these reactionary misogenist , jew- hating ,gay-hanging, terror-supporting psychotic assholes in charge there, I have no problem for Israel to do what is necessary to protect itself.

I'm sure you lamented when Israel took out Iraq's and syria's nuclear facility....preemptively.

Maybe you're right, Israel should be hit with a few nukes and then you MIGHT think differently

[leveymg]

6. Just last week.

You do a nice job of twisting statements inside out. Iran lacks the capability to carry out such a thing, but Israel threatens Iran with the use of nuclear and C/B weapons if Iran were to actually utilize its limited chemical weapons capability in a conflict.

For more on Israeli nuclear doctrine, please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option

Specifically, on the issue of an Israeli nuclear response, and the status of its own chemical weapons program, please see: Jonathan B. Tucker, "The Future of Chemical Weapons":

Little public information is available about Israel’s CW capabilities. Tel Aviv signed the CWC in January 1993, committing politically to abide by the basic aims of the treaty, but the Israeli parliament decided in 1997 not to ratify until all of Israel’s Arab neighbors agree to follow suit. The top-secret Israel Institute for Biological Research near the town of Ness Ziona is known to conduct research and development on chemical defenses, but some suspect that it does offensive work as well. In addition, there have long been unsubstantiated rumors about an Israeli chemical weapons stockpile in the Negev Desert. Despite the potential harm to Israel’s chemical industry from CWC-mandated restrictions on trade in Schedule 2 chemicals with countries that refuse to join the treaty, security rather than economic concerns have dominated the Israeli debate over ratification. Military analysts such as Gerald M. Steinberg of Bar-Ilan University have argued that the tacit threat of Israeli nuclear retaliation in response to a Syrian or Iranian chemical attack would not be credible because of its lack of proportionality, while relying exclusively on retaliation with conventional weapons would not provide a sufficient deterrent. According to Steinberg, by remaining outside the CWC, Israel creates uncertainty in the minds of potential military adversaries that it may have the capability to retaliate in kind to a chemical attack, thereby bolstering deterrence.

A major stumbling block to chemical disarmament in the Middle East has been the political and strategic linkage that exists between chemical and nuclear arms. Although neither Egypt nor Syria admit possessing chemical weapons, both countries have refused to join the CWC until Israel openly acknowledges its undeclared nuclear arsenal and accedes to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear-weapons state. The current deadlock over chemical disarmament in the Middle East is likely to persist unless and until the peace process eases regional tensions and addresses the core security needs on both sides of the Arab-Israeli divide.

[jimmie]

7. You're kidding , right?

You said "Israel's threatening the actual preemptive use of nuclear weapons "...I called you on that and you give me some analyst who talks about CWC ? Thats it? Thats your proof? It appears you either didnt tell the truth or maybe you have personal feelings about israel that blind you from reality.( that is not a personal attack)

Israel has not once threatenened to use nukes.

The ONLY one in this story who is threatening destruction are the WAR-MONGERING lunatics in the iranian regime.

[leveymg]

8. I kid you not. Israel effectively used nuclear blackmail to force U.S. arms shipments

Last edited Mon May 21, 2012, 08:39 PM - Edit history (3)

during the '73 War. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War

By October 8, Israel had encountered military difficulties on both fronts. In the Sinai, Israeli efforts to break through Egyptian lines with armor had been thwarted, and while Israel had contained and begun to turn back the Syrian advance, Syrian forces were still overlooking the Jordan River and their air defense systems were inflicting a high toll on Israeli planes.[244][245][246] It became clear by October 9 that no quick reversal in Israel's favor would occur and that IDF losses were unexpectedly high.[247]

During the night of October 8–9, an alarmed Dayan told Meir that "this is the end of the third temple."[245] He was warning of Israel's impending total defeat, but "Temple" was also the code word for nuclear weapons.[246] Dayan again raised the nuclear topic in a cabinet meeting, warning that the country was approaching a point of "last resort."[248] That night Meir authorized the assembly of thirteen 20-kiloton-of-TNT (84 TJ) tactical atomic weapons for Jericho missiles at Sdot Micha Airbase, and F-4 aircraft at Tel Nof Airbase, for use against Syrian and Egyptian targets.[246] They would be used if absolutely necessary to prevent total defeat, but the preparation was done in an easily detectable way, likely as a signal to the United States.[248] Kissinger learned of the nuclear alert on the morning of October 9. That day, President Nixon ordered the commencement of Operation Nickel Grass, an American airlift to replace all of Israel's material losses.[249] Anecdotal evidence suggests that Kissinger told Sadat that the reason for the U.S. airlift was that the Israelis were close to "going nuclear."[246] European countries refused to allow US airplanes carrying supplies for Israel to refuel at their bases, fearing an Arab oil embargo, with the exception of Portugal and the Netherlands.

You seem to be unfamiliar with the history of Israel's use of threats of nuclear weapons as realpolitik. Also, related, please read this about the context of how Israel launched its preemptive '67 war right after it developed its first operational atomic warheads: http://observer.com/2006/12/28/did-israels-acquisition-of-nuclear-weapons-lead-to-1967-war/

[jimmie]

9. Oy vey

First of all we were talking about Iran .

2nd you bring up the 73 war from almost 40 years ago.

3rd we can debate whether the 67 war was a preemptive or preventative strike.

I can see we have a failure to communicate.

So last question who is the warmonger threatening to destroy the other ?

I'll give you a hint....it's not Israel.

[leveymg]

10. You think they aren't blackmailing the U.S. again, this time over Iran's enrichment program?

Oy vey, indeed.

[jimmie]

11. i guess youre right

because i dont know what to say.

i'm done.

[ak1]

12. Not only

For me the the biggest issue for the UN should be, equality for humanity world wide period. One singular group of people under civil law with equal guarantees & protection, where the laws of a religious faith have no standing in civil code. Where man's laws support the Civil Liberties of each person & of society for the sake of humanity, not because of a passage in one of the religions holy books.