The United States and Iran, and ok... Iraq

A couple of weeks ago, I did something I don't often do -- read through the entire Washington Post. I suppose I was bored. Or maybe I was hungry for news. During this quest for information, I stumbled across something that infuriated me so much, for two reasons. One, that it happened, and two, that it was buried deep within an obscure article, and deep within the paper.

Following is the text of a letter-to-the editor I e-mailed the Post:

"The Post today buried an alarming news item on page A21 in Al Kamen’s column, “In the Loop.” The blurb stated that, “Washington has discovered there are always ways to work together (with Iran), to find common ground. For example, human rights groups Monday condemned a U.S. move "back[ing] an Iranian initiative to deny United Nations consultative status" in the Economic and Social Council to gay rights organizations.”

WHAT?

According to the International Lesbian and Gay Organization (ILGA), the U.S. joined Cameroon, China, Cuba, Iran, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Senegal, Sudan and Zimbabwe in voting to deny ILGA and the Danish Association of Gays and Lesbians seats on the U.N.’s Economic and Social Council.

Chile, France, Germany, Peru and Romania voted in favor, so had the U.S. not voted as it had, nothing would have changed—almost nothing. For the uber conservative Bush administration to back a member of its self-described Axis of Evil on this or any topic, is reprehensible. Just yesterday, Secretary of State Condolleezza Rice said of Iran to Reuters, “It is the largest state sponsor of terrorism. It is a state that has now a president who says the most outrageous things about other states, like that Israel should be wiped off the map. So Iran is in the wrong direction.”

Not if that direction is at the expense of gay human rights groups, though. Mr. Bush ought to demand that this vote be retracted, and the Post and the rest of the mainstream media ought to hang their heads for burying this critical piece of news in the closet."

It should come as no surprise that the Post did not run my letter.

In subsequent reporting I have seen on this issue, the State Department, under the leadership of Ms. Rice, has said that basically it's all a misunderstanding and that the United States was concerned that one of the organizations seeking membership on the Economic and Social Council might not have a strong enough policy against pedophilia. Now just what kind of chicken shit logic is that? Sadly, I have only seen mention of this news in gay media outlets.

DC's Metro Weekly reported last week that, "this U.N. fight has now arrived in Washington. LGBT organizations have begun lobbying allies on Capitol Hill. Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), founder and co-chair of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, as well as the only Holocaust survivor to serve in Congress, responded immediately in a letter to John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

''I sincerely hope that the U.S. vote on this issue was a technical error or the unfortunate result of an undisciplined U.S. officer operating on his or her own without instructions,'' writes Lantos. ''In any case, I am asking you to clearly and publicly disavow and explain this anti-human rights vote before it does any long-term damage to U.S. moral authority at the U.N. I would also like to discuss with you, at length, any possible breakdown in State Department procedures that may have led to this most unfortunate U.S. action.''

As of Jan. 31, Lantos's office reports no response from Bolton. A Metro Weekly call to the State Department days earlier to inquire both about the reason for the vote as well as any signal in policy change was answered by spokesman, Noel Clay, who said, ''We're not going to have any comment on it.'"

I don't know if I truly believe that there was anything sinister involved with this UN vote. I want to believe Congressman Lantos' hope that it was a big mistake, yet refusal from the State Department, and the White House on this matter doesn't give me much hope that this was in fact the case. George W. Bush and his administration continues to show a disregard for true human rights all the while spreading his message of peace throughout the world, evidenced in the body bags which arrive stateside from Iraq to the point where I think we've all become numb to it.

While spending a couple of rare mid-winter 60-degree days at the beach not too long ago, I was enjoying some draft beer at one of my favorite Rehoboth watering holes, the Frogg Pond. Sports were on TV mostly, and then one TV started showing CNN, who were airing video footage of kidnapped journalist Jill Carroll. I see images like that, of a clearly terrified young woman, and wonder why? Sure, she chose to be in Iraq to report for her newspaper. But would such reporting be necessary if Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, Ms. Rice and Mr. Rumsfeld would end the thing and bring our men and women home? Perhaps. Would she had been there if the way didn't start at all? It's doubtful. When I saw the image of Ms. Carroll, I had to turn away, I just could not stomach it.

I wonder sometimes what the average citizen of the world thinks of the United States. Do they think of us all with disdain? With disgust? Do they truly understand that in the last two elections, almost an equal number of people voted for the losing party? Do they know that a vast majority of Americans do not support this war? I've been invited on a trip this fall to the Amalfi Coast of Italy. Will I be too embarrassed at being an American to go?