Roger L. Simon: Will the left respond to Ahmadinejad's homophobic insanity?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made one of the most insane and reactionary statements I have heard a national leader say in public ever at Columbia today: 'In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who has told you that we have it.'

Yet he still was well received in the audience. How in the world could they do that? Let us see now if the supposedly pro-gay left wakes up and sees where the danger really is. I'm not holding my breath. They didn't wake up in the 1930s - why should they now?

Comments

Comments require registration through TypeKey. Abusive remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Roger Simon.

It is not the East River or the Hudson to the west. Here in New York City, we dwell in the heart of Denial Delta.

This is what the One World Government will look like. Armored motorcades ferrying unelected shopper-technocrats around Midtown, security personnel doing a poor job of concealing the MP5 carbines just below rear-passenger-window-level. The bullying bloop of the official siren applying the sonic boot to anyone with the temerity to cross with the light.

A taxpayer funded cordon of blue guarding the Waldorf. A crippled man being shooed off the SE corner of Fifty and Park by police and made to cross to the west to prevent him drawing too close to the epicenter of World Government Hospitality. A temporary police watchtower with opaqued windows looming at the corner of 51st and Park. And I can only imagine the sneers of gratitude from all of our visitors.

I think, I hope, however, that the absolute, glaring hypocrisy of this situation; the brightly-silhouetting irony of it, may actually awaken a few people here. Maybe just for the inconvenience it all creates. Maybe. The clock's running. On our own country, too. Dostoevsky asked it best: "Freedom or bread?"

'In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran we do not have this phenomenon.'

It may take a while for what happened at Columbia to sink into the left-leaning audience. But it's hard to imagine that some seeds of reality weren't sewn. If not then we're really in for it.

Mahmoud left the stage looking like the weasel he is, and by the way, there was no white light emanating from his head.

How much is the NY Times going to charge Columbia for the "Mahmoud betrayed us" add?

Fox News says he was booed quite a lot by the audience, while Bollinger's introductory lambaste was applauded.

I think it's pretty clear that he is not well-liked at Columbia. I expected him to be treated a little better, but I'm happy to be wrong.

Penis Heal is that a nick name or a location? Or are you referring Ahmamadjihadi?

I regret to say we may never know the answer to your question, Peter. I was forced to ban Penis Heal because he or she was posting to my site on various posts of different age at the rate of about thirty comments a minute. Quite prolific, don't you think?

'In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who has told you that we have it.'

I think this may be a problem of defining our terms. He may mean “flaming” homosexual. I spent eighteen continuous months in Iran and never saw a “flaming” homosexual. On the other hand I would estimate that over 90 per cent of the adult male population has had homosexual relations, many, if not most, on a regular basis. When contact with unmarried women is banned, what would you expect?

It’s funny when a man is brought before a judge for having sex with another man. The verdict is easy. “Of course he is guilty. We all do that.”

Hopping around HuffPo looking at commenters' reactions, I see a lot of things like this: "Sure, he's crazy, BUT....
..."at least he has the guts to face a confrontational audience, unlike Bu$h."

I honestly don't know what some people are going to with themselves when Bush steps down in 2009.

Try to be optimistic, Stace --maybe, without the BDS cut-out, they'll take up "thinking" again.

It's hard to have any of "them", when he kills them all. Who in the world would want to admit being a homosexual in Iran? Perhaps that was the only useful statement to come out of his mouth, useful in the sense that even some moonbats would have to see he is a loon.

Not to worry, Stace. Sanity can be measured in inverse proportion to Huffington post reaction to events. They are like hounds who invariably sniff out the poisonous mushrooms.

You link to a video of Ahmadinejad's gay comments getting massive derisive laughter and BOOs. Then you say "Yet he still was well received in the audience". Incredibly delusional. You had your mind made up before he ever set foot on the stage.

Buddy, I sure hope so. I also hope that someone boxes me about the ears if I ever become so deranged that I equate an American political opponent with Hitler.

Meanwhile, things are deteriorating in comments at Jane Smiley's post at HuffPo.

"Ahmadinejad hasn't turned war into a corporate venture, torture into a parlor game and imperialism into a mission statement."

Thank you for calling me "incredigly delusional,"thpatte. I would describe myself as "credibly delusional." But no matter. I did listen to the entire speech and heard many moments when Ahmadinejad was interrupted by applause. But the, as you say, I'm delusional. Erase my opinion.

Roger,he was being laughed at,and I don't think that he liked it...He thought that he was going to get a bunch of softball questions,and he didn't....He was,I'm happy to say....ambushed!

Perhaps my failure to embrace the glorious wonders of faggotry make me less of an American.

Once again we are treated to the glaring irrationality of todays "liberals." In the Clinton years, their defense of Bill de-legitimatized radical feminism. Their relixive multi-culturalist belief that America is always bad and our enemies always right has kept them from properly responding to the extreme anti-liberal behavior of Islamist regimes and groups. They are so confused about Bush, and about war waged by Republicans, that they tolerate the intolerant and attack those who fight for democracy and tolerant societies.

They suffer from the Cognitive Disorder of Progressives. Even when confronted with the paradoxes inherent in their world view, they just can't see it.

Nope. Roger is right. The full (81 minute) video is available here. Or you can just refer to the transcript here (I watched it: where it says "applause," there is, in fact, applause). Notably, there was applause after repeated claims of Iran as a peace-loving nation, a victim rather than a sponsor of terrorism, and refusal to make a straight answer on whether Iran seeks the destruction of Israel (along with an equivocation about studying the Holocaust . . . presumably to determine if it actually happened).

Moreover, the "tough questioning" glossed over his repeated [risible] claims that Iran's nuclear program was intended for peaceful purposes and certified as such by the IAEA. Except for the introduction, and the brief bit of derisive laughter over the "we don't have homosexuals" nonsense, he was afforded a respectful platform for his propaganda efforts. And, at least for the most important one (the potential casus belli of the Iranian nuclear weapons program), they were fairly successful.

Errrrr, what part of an Ivy League audience laughing out loud in a clearly mocking tone, one that got thru Ahmadinejad's translation filter and hit him in Farsi, was not enough of a "left response" for ya, RogerHell?

I think this may be a problem of defining our terms. He may mean “flaming” homosexual.

OK, so we all had a nice chuckle at Ahmadinejad's expense. Who cares? This guy is a nut and a dangerous one at that. The lesson to be taken from this guy is we need to have the determination not to let his ilk get the last laugh. Unfortunately, I doubt we have the stomach for that and rectifying the situation will cost many lives.

Of course, Ahma-dinnah-jacket is absolutely right - they don't have any homosexuals in Iran (that they know about).

Nuts. That was supposed to be The Mad Mullahs(tm) - but with the "tm" symbol. It showed up OK in preview....

I'm sorry no one at Columbia was bright enough to pair the Little President with an Iranian dissident for a real debate. Now I wonder how many on the Left are aware of how press reports concerning his performance are being "sanitized" in Iran and elsewhere in the Middle East. I wish it were possible to sit some of our university students down to analyze the differences between the speech as it happened and as it is being presented to the Muslim world.

Convenient to have a crack-down on critical journalism in Iran just as this event hits the news.

"... what was said ... at Columbia is of no consequence whatsoever. What matters is that by inviting Ahmadinejad to its campus, Columbia University announced that supporting or opposing the genocide of the Jews is a legitimate topic for discussion. In so doing, as an institution Columbia has taken itself beyond the pale of legitimate discourse. As an institution, Columbia has embraced depravity by renouncing the intrinsic sanctity of human life."

September 24, 2007: Will the left respond to Ahmadinejad's homophobic insanity?

Comments

Post a comment

Email This Post