Iranian Santa

Admittedly, my being Israeli and gay does not increase my likelihood of wanting to hear a Christmas greeting by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Though I do not know whom he hates more -- gays or Israelis -- I happen to belong to both groups. So there's very little doubt as to how he feels about me.

And there should be little doubt as to how I feel about him. Nor should there be any doubt as to how Britain's Channel 4 feels about him. Or so I thought.

In a controversial move, Channel 4 invited the Iranian president to deliver an alternative Christmas speech, to be aired shortly after the Queen's. Channel 4 news chief Dorothy Byrne was quoted as responding to criticism by saying that "as the leader of one of the most powerful states in the Middle East, President Ahmadinejad's views are enormously influential."

Byrne is, of course, correct. Ahmadinejad is powerful. Which is exactly what makes him dangerous. And it is also why Channel 4's decision to turn him into a legitimate and harmless figure, a Persian Santa if you will, is so outrageous.

But Byrne errs in saying that "this message continues a long tradition of offering a different perspective on the world around us." She is confusing reporting on different perspectives with displaying them.

Indeed, to uphold its professional duty, Channel 4 is required to rigorously track Ahmadinejad's "different perspective" and tell us about it. It should send its top reporters to Tehran and ask him difficult questions about his positions and how he proposes to promote them in the Middle East.

In fact, Ahmadinejad's public statements are outrageous enough to put him in the headlines on a daily basis. Ahmadinejad, in all honesty, is a household name not because of its catchy ring but rather due to the man's knack for making good quotes.

Among his finer statements are "Israel should be wiped off the map" and "we do not have homosexuals in Iran." And this is why Channel 4 invited him to address the British nation. They wanted a celebrity, and Ahmadinejad is a sure bet.

To be sure, I do not think Channel 4 supports the destruction of the State of Israel, nor the execution of homosexuals. No. The problem is that Channel 4's officials think that public statements by a leader of a country on the verge of acquiring nuclear capabilities are a joke. And therein lies Channel 4's biggest lie.

Channel 4 invited Ahmadinejad to speak not because it wants to offer viewers "a different perspective," but because it believes this different perspective is a ridiculous joke, and not something that can ever be implemented with, say, nuclear arms.

That is the true message that Channel 4 is airing for the holidays. And it's a far cry from a Christmas greeting.

This article was originally published in Haaretz and appears here with its permission.

Comments

[lisa12345]

Outstanding article. You are very courageous, I mean that. Sincerely. You are going to get some major fallout for this one.

Yoav, I support Israel but I believe the best way to end the issues with Palestine is to agree to certain terms. It is no secret that I would like a two-state solution. I state this because I want the readers to know that I am not taking a side with Israel against anyone. I am going to post about Iran, not Palestine.

Yoav, what is starting to happen is very serious. I am sure you are aware of the UN docs relating to decriminalizing homosexuality and the "push" by the Arab union to keep it illegal. Also, the doc relating to restricting speech in any country that criticizes Islamic religion. This should be covered by the MSM. It is not. This move by the British concerns me because they now have active Sharia courts. It is like something happens every week to concern me more. We have to get back to being progressives and real liberals and show some courage. We used to be a group that wasn't afraid to be against the Status Quo and now we are obediently politicall­y-correct. IMO, we need to stand up and set boundaries. That means, make it clear to the world exactly what it is we believe in and stand for. We then need to make sure these boundaries are not violated in our own society.

Thank you.

[Hass]

Ahmadinejad said we don't have homosexuals like in your country...­meaning openly gay culture.
And he did not say "wipe Israel off the map"

However, lets look at some facts: Israel IS IN FACT wiping out the Palestinians -- the perfect definition of genocide, incidentally.

And Bush has explicitly threatened Iran with nuclear first strikes that would murder about 3 million people at least.

So, who is the real threat here? Ahmadinejad? Nope, sorry.

[Henry]

I am not sure that you are aware of this, but when the state of Israel was established there was a vote at the U.N. and all of the Arab countries voted against the establishment. It would follow, logically that Iran believes that the state of Israel should be wiped off the map. You know... I once heard a global Israeli state that "we need to get rid of the Ayahtollahs". The Muslims do not like Israel plopped down right in the middle of their homeland. Whose religious book has the right claim to title of the land? Now... we're all in the middle of a family fight, an ugly family fight. One that wasp American taxpayers have been implicated in, in a very ugly unwitting sort of propagandized way.

[MTGradwell]

Among his finer statements are "Israel should be wiped off the map"

His actual words were (quoting Ayatollah Khomeini) "this regime occupying Jerusalem must [vanish from] the page of time".

He later clarified this as meaning the Zionist regime in Israel would eventually collapse on its own. He denied that Iran would ever instigate military action, there being "no need for any measures by the Iranian people". Compare this with the incessant urges from Western sources for death to be rained down upon Iran.

...and "we do not have homosexuals in Iran."

Amadinejad did not say "we don't have homosexuals, period". He said "we don't have homosexuals like in your country .. We don't have this phenomenon". An aide later clarified that this meant "compared to American society, we don't have many homosexuals". It seems plausible that he was simply saying he didn't have a ready answer to the question that was put to him because he had never previously had to deal with the issue.

Ahmadinejad has said " I am not anti-Jew, I respect them very much"; and "if they [the Palestinians] want to keep the Zionists, they can stay ... Whatever the people decide [through a free and open referendum] , we will respect it".

You speculate about which he hates more, gays or Israelis. What has he actually said that indicates that he hates anything? His Christmas message was one of peace. What makes it worse than the belated Israeli Christmas message to the Palestinians?