UK Green Party Parliamentary candidate Peter Tatchell: ‘allowing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s alternative Christmas message is aiding and abetting a homophobic tyrant’

From pinknews.co.uk:

Channel 4’s decision to allow Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to deliver the Alternative Christmas message is aiding and abetting a homophobic tyrant says gay rights campaigner and Green Party Parliamentary Candidate Peter Tatchell.

President Ahmadinejad is a torturer and a murderer. His regime executes gay people, children, journalists, Sunni Muslims, political dissidents and ethnic minorities. This is the equivalent of giving Robert Mugabe a prime-time television slot to promote his propaganda. It is an insult to more than 100,000 Iranians who have been slaughtered since the Islamic fundamentalists seized power in 1979

Channel 4 should pull the plug on this criminal despot, who ranks with Robert Mugabe, Omar al-Bashir of Sudan and the Burmese military junta as one of the world’s most bloody rulers.

Iran has the death penalty for same-sex relationships. US journalist Doug Ireland has documented the arrest, jailing, flogging and execution of gay Iranians:

Channel 4’s Controller of News and Current Affairs Dorothy Byrne together with the other Channel 4 executives would not being giving Ahmadinejad this propaganda coup if it was their partners or children who were being tortured in Evin prison, Tehran.

This Christmas in Iran, thousands of families are grief-stricken. Their loved ones have been jailed, tortured and executed. Instead of inviting one of them deliver The Alternative Christmas Message, Channel 4 is giving airtime to the man responsible for their loved ones’ suffering.

Continues at http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-10068.html

There is also a Green Party of Iran, an Iranian political party based in exile in Quebec, Canada. As a Green Party, it supports the basic world wide green values, and is one of the Iranian political parties that supports such issues as a secular legal system and gay rights.

More about Peter Tatchell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Tatchell

30 thoughts on “UK Green Party Parliamentary candidate Peter Tatchell: ‘allowing Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s alternative Christmas message is aiding and abetting a homophobic tyrant’

  1. paulie cannoli Post author

    GE – I don’t think it’s that simple. Tatchell’s wikipedia entry is an interesting read. I recommend it if you have a few minutes and a willingness to consider different perspectives that you may not normally think of coexising.

  2. G.E.

    I recommend it if you have a few minutes and a willingness to consider different perspectives that you may not normally think of

    Okay. Read. The guy’s not a neocon. He’s a Nazi.

  3. G.E.

    The cretin also engaged in invasive “outtings” of people who preferred to keep that aspect of their lives private (no privacy under the Greens’ Total State!) and made irresponsible comments speculating on Eminem’s “repressed” sexuality.

  4. paulie cannoli Post author

    What do you need? A swastika armband?

    Well, that would be sufficient, unless it was, say, part of a theatrical production or meant to make some ironic point in some easily understood way. But an armband would not be required. Having a mix of views that is known as national socialism would. I did not get that from reading his bio.


    A bust of Lenin on his desk?

    Well, if he has one, and if it symbolizes admiration for Lenin’s views, that would make him a communist, not a national socialist.

    He may in fact be a communist, but I don’t know that for a fact. That would seem to be more plausible from what I read than that he is a nazi.


    The guy’s views and actions are evil.

    Some of them, yes. Not all.

  5. G.E.

    Well, if he has one, and if it symbolizes admiration for Lenin’s views, that would make him a communist, not a national socialist.

    That was a reference to the past Communism of many neocons… Rupert Murdoch being the exact example.

    The guy’s views and actions are evil.

    Some of them, yes. Not all.

    Hitler had his good points too, I’m sure.

  6. Deran

    I’m no fan of Mr. Ahmadinejad, but comrade G.E., if I recall correctly, you were all up in everyones face because some of us are critical of the PRC and of participation in the Beijing Olympics.

    But, in this case you’ve opted to be critical of a murderous, authoritarian regime? please do try and keep you moral line clear. It would make your opinions seem less full of bologna.

    Ahmadinejad is a hot air potentate. Lot’s of yelling and podium pounding to try and distract the Iranians from the very real problems they have internally.

    I’m also 100% for marriage equality on a state and federal level. I know you, GE, oppose government role in marriage; but are you even opposed to repression of homosexuals yourself? I know you’ve got that Christian virus.

    Hitler may have been a vegetarian and dog lover, but he lead a mass genocide. Ahmadinejad may rant abt Israel, and Iran does kill gays (male homosexuals at least), but he has not lead a genocide, nor initiated a war.

    And comparing Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao, to anyone else is a fairly dubious intellectual exercise. Maybe Andrew Jackson, he was our greatest genocider.

  7. paulie cannoli Post author

    But, in this case you’ve opted to be critical of a murderous, authoritarian regime?

    Deran – I’m not sure you followed the line of thread comments correctly. GE called the anti-Ahmadinejad protester, Tatchell, a nazi. He did not call Ahmadinejad a nazi.

    I know you’ve got that Christian virus.

    GE is an atheist.

    And comparing Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao, to anyone else is a fairly dubious intellectual exercise.

    My ancestors Genghis Khan and Tamerlane may have racked up something like similar-order body counts, but their “accomplishment” was more impressive, since they did it without anything approaching 20th century technology.

    In terms of population percentage, the worst I know of is Pol Pot, at least among populations that number in the millions — e.g. near 100% in Jonestown, but it was tiny.

    But I don’t think even GE said that Tatchell is Hitler-like in his accomplishments – after all, no nazis except Hitler were Hitler.

  8. G.E.

    Comrade Deran – You need to read more carefully. I haven’t uttered a single critical word about Ahmadinejad — not that I think he’s above criticism, but your assertion and all questions that flow from it make no sense.

  9. paulie cannoli Post author

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Shi_Rebellion

    took place in China during the Tang Dynasty, from December 16, 755 to February 17, 763.

    Death toll, legacy, and historical implications

    The rebellion spanned the reigns of three emperors, starting during the reign of Xuanzong and ending during the reign of Daizong. The toll of dead and missing, including those caused by suppression and famine, is estimated at up to 36 million, which would be 2/3 of the total taxroll population at the time. Total world population at the time is estimated at 207-224 million. Numerically, this was the highest toll for any event for nearly 1200 years, until World War II surpassed it.

  10. paulie cannoli Post author

    (Possibly) The Twenty (or so) Worst Things People Have Done to Each Other:

    from above…

    Rank Death Toll Cause Centuries
    1 55 million Second World War 20C
    2 40 million Mao Zedong (mostly famine) 20C
    3 40 million Mongol Conquests 13C
    4 36 million An Lushan Revolt 8C
    5 25 million Fall of the Ming Dynasty 17C
    6 20 million Taiping Rebellion 19C
    7 20 million Annihilation of the American Indians 15C-19C
    8 20 million Iosif Stalin 20C
    9 19 million Mideast Slave Trade 7C-19C
    10 18 million Atlantic Slave Trade 15C-19C
    11 17 million Timur Lenk 14C-15C
    12 17 million British India (mostly famine) 19C
    13 15 million First World War 20C
    14 9 million Russian Civil War 20C
    15 8 million Fall of Rome 3C-5C
    16 8 million Congo Free State 19C-20C
    17 7 million Thirty Years War 17C
    18 5 million Russia’s Time of Troubles 16C-17C
    19 4 million Napoleonic Wars 19C
    20 3 million Chinese Civil War 20C
    21 3 million French Wars of Religion 16C

  11. JimDavidson

    I disagree with at least two of those figures. World War 2 is badly understated, as is Mao’s death toll.

    Over 70 million were killed in WW2. I think something like 80 million were butchered by Mao.

  12. JimDavidson

    Honestly, Paulie, I don’t care. It comes off as minimising the extent of damage in the war and by Mao, and by Stalin. I think the atrocities during the An Shi rebellion were certainly horrid. But that doesn’t excuse making light of the war dead in WW2 or by Mao or by Stalin. There’s something very ugly about discarding tens of millions of dead people because it is inconvenient to look at them.

  13. paulie cannoli Post author

    There’s something very ugly about discarding tens of millions of dead people because it is inconvenient to look at them.

    No one is doing any such thing here. It is just that different historians have different estimates. What they are doing is averaging the estimates from all the sources they have available that have made a serious effort to study the particular events in question.

    Whether 40 or 80 million people died in a given event, it was still mostrously horrible; it is beyond my scope of knowledge to figure out which number is correct, or something in between, but it seems reasonable that an average of several historical studies is more likely to be closest to the truth than just one by itself.

  14. JimDavidson

    This is nonsense. Averaging sources is necessarily discarding millions of dead people.

    It is not beyond your scope of knowledge to ascertain which methodology is better. Just read what they write. Rummel does extensive footnote work to establish and document his statements. Averaging his statements against a bunch of Marxists who think Mao should be given a free pass for mass murder doesn’t make any sense.

    You can find plenty of Hitler enthusiasts who will say that there were no Jews exterminated in Germany. Does it make sense to average in their number for dead in WW2? It does not.

    Averaging studies is like meta analysis in science. It is senseless. Most meta analysis begins by discarding the studies which give significant results in the undesired direction.

  15. paulie cannoli Post author

    Averaging sources is necessarily discarding millions of dead people.

    Only if you assume that the highest of the estimates is correct.

    Rummel does extensive footnote work to establish and document his statements.

    So do all of the historians cited. It is not an exact science, when dealing with chaotic times, records many of which have been destroyed or lost, etc. Some people in the past have exagerated and others have covered up various events, then other have distorted source material etc. Some of errors were intentional, some not.

    So what we have here, are the averages of a number of historians who have spent significant chunks of their lives studying the particular events in question.

    So, yes, it is beyond the scope of my knowledge to be an expert on everything and know which one is correct.

    What I do know is bad methodology is picking the facts to pick my desired result. Like you, I wish to demonstrate that regimes have been extremely deadly. That does not mean that, when looking at a range of estimates of exactly how deadly they have been, I should pick the highest estimate every time.

    Averaging his statements against a bunch of Marxists who think Mao should be given a free pass for mass murder doesn’t make any sense.

    Which Marxists?

    You can find plenty of Hitler enthusiasts who will say that there were no Jews exterminated in Germany. Does it make sense to average in their number for dead in WW2? It does not.

    I did not see any of those included in the sources. All the sources they used for the Jewish holocaust were estimates in the 5m-6m range. So clearly they are not just including just anyone.

    Averaging studies is like meta analysis in science. It is senseless. Most meta analysis begins by discarding the studies which give significant results in the undesired direction.

    It is not at all clear that there is an undesired direction here, unless you mean, e.g., things like them excluding the studies of holocaust deniers/revisionists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *