The Execution of Jafar Kiani

July 14, 2007 at 12:33 am | Posted in Amnesty International, democracy, executions, Human Rights, Iran, UN | Leave a comment

The Meydaan organisation has reported that Jafar Kiani was executed on the 5 July 2007 in Iran. They also reported that Dr. Alireza Jamshidi, the Iranian judiciary spokesman, gave a press conference on Tuesday 10 July 2007, in which he reputedly said, “Lately there has been a stoning sentence executed by a judge in Takistan branch,” contrary to the existing moratorium on stoning but “the woman’s [Mokarrameh Ebrahimi] sentence is stayed now.” Adding, “The extent to which the ban order can deprive a judge from independence is a long discussion, but a judge can act independently, although with the order of the Head of Judiciary, it is necessary to exercise more caution in issuing and executing these sentences.”

However, this press conference was not reported by the Iranian media nor was it attended by the international media. In fact, as is clear from the  statement of Louise Arbour, the UN rapporteur on Human Rights, Iran is yet to confirm the execution of Jafar Kiani took place. 

Therefore, how is it that a Western based anti capital punishment NGO attended a press briefing that no one else appears to know about?

Surely, this is a pregnant question for any journalist reporting this story?  

This is not to say this execution did no take place: it may very well have done. However, until such time as the Iranian government provides a detailed account; all claims are mere conjecture and rumour.

It is noteworthy that previous reports of executions by U.S. sponsored groups have transpired to be factually inaccruate. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch for instance, have never accruately reported an Iranian execution since 2005. Yet when the Western media quotes these organisations on Iran this is never stated.

Moreover, if the events are as reported in this case, far from the Iranian State executing this man; it is a local judge, in defiance of the order of the Head of the Judiciary. Thus the Iranian State is not culpable. Moreover, contrary to Louise Arbour’s suggestion and attempts made by Western lobby groups to make it so; stoning is not an offence against international law.

Human Rights Abuse Masquerading as Human Rights Advocacy

June 28, 2007 at 2:01 pm | Posted in Amnesty International, Human Rights, Iran, Shirin Ebadi | Leave a comment

Amnesty International professes concern about human rights in Iran, yet this very organisation maintained a wall of silence about Shahist Iran, which was one of the most brutal regimes, if not the most brutal, of the Twentieth Century. Whatever one may think of the Islamic Republic of Iran, no country has improved its human rights record as much as Iran has since 1979. Whilst undoubtedly human rights abuses do still occur in Iran; it was the Islamic Revolution that introduced both democracy and civil liberties to Iran: there were neither under the despotic Western backed Shahist regime.

Amnesty International’s claim to be a non-governmental organisation are palpable nonsense; throughout its history it has been indirectly funded by various Western governments, and certainly promotes Western interests. This is particularly so in the Middle East. Amnesty International is a resolutely pro Zionist organisation, which fuels its hostility towards the Islamic Republic of Iran – the only independently autonomous Islamic State.

Thus Amnesty International devotes far more energy in opposing the legitimate democratically elected government of Iran than it does any other government, even though Iran has the best human rights record of any country in the Middle East and is the only democratic State in the region. Amnesty International rarely censors illegitimate and undemocratic governments supported by the West, such as the Saudi and Israeli regimes.

The conflict of interest and inconsistency is all too obvious. Amnesty International’s report, “Iran: the last executioner of children“, is testament to that. The Iranian government and judiciary has resolutely said that Iran does not execute children, this has been resolutely stated by . Yet Amnesty International which has produced not a shred of evidence to the contrary, claims that it does; despite the fact that the organisation and has neither offices nor investigators in Iran to validate its claims.

Thus the organisation makes the claims without corroboration, in the full knowledge that it is bereft: this is undeniable racist, since Amnesty International would not adopt such low standards before accusing a Western government of lying. In fact, Amnesty International fails to point out that Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine, children are routinely executed without trial by the occupying forces.

However, a more startling piece of hypocrisy is that Amnesty International lionise Shirin Ebadi and even have gone so far as to suggest that she is a human rights lawyer. Nothing could be further from the truth; she was personally appointed by the Shah to serve as a judge at the age of 27, six months after graduating in law. Thus she has never been a lawyer of standing in Iran; rather, she acquired her position through nepotism.

More importantly, she served in the judiciary under the Shah for ten years before the Islamic revolution. The judiciary under the Shah were complicit in the torture and murder of millions. Political prisoners, including children, were: tortured to near madness on Apollo machines, sexually mutilated, raped and sentenced to death in absentia. This is the standard of justice and human rights that Shirin Ebadi, Nobel laureate, supported in Iran throughout the seventies, which is why she will always be loathed in Iran.

A State Within A State

December 10, 2006 at 1:36 pm | Posted in Blair, Britain, Human Rights, Iran, Met Police, Racism | 1 Comment

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled that in 1999 the Met Police Anti-Corruption squad unlawfully tapped the telephone conversations of Chief superintendent Ali Dizaei, the Met’s most senior Muslim officer and legal adviser to the National Black Police Association, in 1999. The operation – codenamed Helios – was directly overseen by Met Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair, back when he was deputy commissioner.

The team of 40 officers monitored over 3,500 phone calls made by Ali Dizaei from Kensington police station and the NBPA offices. Ostensibly the investigation was looking into unfounded allegations that Dizaei was an Iranian spy, although Keith Jarrett, president of the NBPA, cast doubt over the sincerity of the investigation:

“The significance of this judgment is to tell the Met that they can’t treat people in this way. It was an attempt to destroy the NBPA, not a corruption inquiry.”

At the time Dizaei was advising officers who were suing the Met for racial discrimination and victimisation. Moreover, despite the fact that this was the biggest police corruption case ever mounted, costing millions, it failed to substantiate any criminal allegation against Dizaei. A token prosecution was brought for an alleged £270 false expense claim but Dizaei was acquitted.

What is most alarming about this case, is not that the Met Police Commissioner headed an unlawful racist and political motivated investigation or indeed that the Met Anti-Corruption squad is itself tainted by racism and corruption; it is that the Prime Minister and then Home Secretary, David Blunkett, would have been fully appraised of the details of operation Helios yet still approved Sir Ian Blair’s appointment as Met Police commissioner. This signals an approval of what amounts to a state within a state.

Reporting Iran

October 24, 2006 at 1:21 pm | Posted in Human Rights, Iran, Media, Monafiqeen-e-Khalq | 6 Comments

Most of what is reported in the Western media about Iran is negative – how much of that do you suppose to be true? How much racist, how much propaganda and how much analysis from those who have never so much as visited Iran?

For instance, lets look at Human Rights: the British media heavily quotes Amnesty International’s and Human Rights Watch’s plethora of reports on the country.

Yet ask the authors of these reports, how many Iranian jails and cities they visited in the course of their research. You might be surprised to find that the answer is none!!!

A fact normally obscured in a small footnote, as it is on the USA State Dept report on Iran. All these stories on Iran cite dissidents. In other words, individuals like former SAVAK agent, Amir Taheri or dubious characters like Shirin Ebadi and Akbar Ganji, who are not above sharing a platform the MeK and the KDPI, who are erronously described as “opposition groups”. Although neither of these terror cults has any political support in Iran. They are no more an “opposition” in Iran than the 7th July bombers are in Britain.

Thus AI and HRW reports are awash with factually inaccruate stories about terrorists, murderer, rapists and traitors, who have been sentenced to death. You might have seen petitions on the net.

Would the British government release Ian Huntley because of a petition signed by a million Iranians?

The purpose of the petition is not to get the convicted criminal reprieved; it is a propaganda exercise, the purpose of which, is to manipualte those who sign the petition into developing an emotional involvement, so they will be less likely to question the facts, and more suspectible to anti Iranian propaganda.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.