RIGHTS
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
Justice under god
15-Dec-2007
Justice must correspond to the necessities of our time. The penal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran is not in compliance with our society’s expectations. Our Iranian norms of morality and Islamic jurisprudence can never be in harmony. To describe how this penal system was mechanically grafted on our society, we must go back to the first years after the revolution of 1979 in Iran to see how the IRI steadily developed ever greater repression, with an increase both in the number of executions and in violence in general throughout the country.
Immediately after the February 1979 revolution, Revolutionary Courts were set up to prosecute agents of the Pahlavi regime. People were tried retroactively for acts which did not constitute penal offences at the time they were committed. Since 1979, according to the statements of opposition groups, 3,350 persons have been executed, more than 2,000 of them since the dismissal of President Bani Sadr, i.e. from June to October 1981.
Accused persons have been put on trial with no previous warning of the charges and no opportunity to prepare a defence, to engage a lawyer or to bring witnesses in their defence. They were condemned to death without any rights of appeal, whether within the law or under clemency and summarily executed. Those not condemned to death were in peril of double jeopardy. An example was General Nazemi who was condemned to 15 years imprisonment, but a few months later was retried on the same charges, condemned to death and executed; this was in violation of all international norms, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Iran is a party (1). Death sentences have been accompanied by flogging or carried out by stoning.
Having dealt with the former officials of the Shah’s regime, the courts began to concentrate on people accused of moral transgressions and of being “counter-revolutionaries” (i.e. anyone opposed to the Khomeini regime). The charges included “corruption on earth” and “waging war against God, his Prophet, his Imam and representatives of the Imam”. This policy followed the line of action which Ayatollah Khomeini emphasised in a speech in the Feyzieh Islamic Institute of Learning: “It is a day to day programme of identifying the opponents of Islam, our struggle against them shall become more intense” (2). And so it did.
The repression discarded rule of any law. Examples of this arbitrary rule were as follows:
--many prisoners under the Shah’s regime were released in February 1979, only to be re-imprisoned, if not executed. Such was the case of Reza Saadati, an MOK member (MOK or the People’s Mojahdin Organisation of Iran is an Islamic opposition group). Mr. Saadati was first sentenced to ten years imprisonment, and then shot after a second, secret trial;
--ethnic minorities (Kurds, Turks, Arabs, Turkamens, and Baluchis) have seen their demand for a greater degree of self-government met with repression. Cases of massacres, imprisonment and executions have been widely reported; religious groups banned by Islam have been increasingly harassed under the IRI. The Baha’is, who numbered about one half million in Iran before the revolution, faced charges such as promotion of prostitution, cooperation with Zionism, spying for imperialist powers, corruption on earth and warring against God. Thousands have lost their homes and possessions, thousands have been dismissed from their jobs and many of them have been executed by revolutionary firing squads;
-- the main opposition groups after the overthrow of the Shah (democratic groups, moderate Islamic groups, the MOK and left-wing opposition) were not only been denied the right to share power in post-revolutionary Iran, but were severely repressed. Not a week has passed without arrests and executions of many of their members;
-- writers, poets and artists are particularly harassed. The first Islamic Revolutionary Judge, Sheik Sadegh Khalkhali, an infamous psychopath, did not hesitate to demand the execution of intellectuals such as Chamlou, a famous Iranian author who was well-known for his non-adherence to any political party and his non-involvement in any political activities. Khalkhali was responsible for many arbitrary executions. According to Judge Abdolkarim Ardibili, President of the Supreme Court, many defence lawyers were arrested, imprisoned and in at least one case, executed;
--those who faced firing squads included women and youths. It was reported Time Magazine on September 20, 1981 that 150 youngsters were shot in a mass execution on September 4(3). In a statement, Tehran’s revolutionary prosecutor, Assadollah Lajevardi declared on June 1981: “Of course, even a 9-year old can be executed if it has been proved to the court that he or she is grown enough”(4). It was reported that 13-year-old children had been shot. Lajevardi continued, “Counter-revolutionary activities, included the distribution of leaflets, incitement of innocent youths to subversion, and participation in demonstrations (charges often leading to death sentences)”. Following this declaration, in a campaign to muzzle dissent in the schools, the IRI arrested teenagers. The number of students barred from school was estimated at over 70,000 in the first two years after the revolution; (5)
--cases of torture and ill-treatment have been regularly reported. The IRI sought to justify these measures as necessary to repress attacks made by terrorists. Undoubtedly, the attack against the Islamic Republic Party (IRP) on June 28, 1981 (killing 74 of the party’s officials and leading Ayatollah Beheshti) and the bombing on August 30, 1981 (killing President Mohammad Ali Radjai and Prime Minister Mohammad Bahonar) were turning points in the escalation of violence and the IRI’s increasing repression. The regime demanded that people help the Judicial Body in arresting counter- revolutionaries, even if they were their own relatives;
-- on August 12, 1981, IRI’s Foreign Ministry ordered Iranian embassies and missions to draw up a list of Baha’is, counter-revolutionaries and “so-called students” living in their jurisdiction. It also prohibited the renewal of their passports and ordered instead issuance of a “transit-paper”, valid only for a return journey to Iran (6);
--lawyers’ defending political prisoners was difficult, and after the two above-mentioned terror attacks on the IRI President and Prime Minister became impossible. Indeed, according to statements by higher judicial officials, the defence of offenders would be contrary to Islamic laws, in that the defender is an accessory to the accused person’s crimes. This was borne out by a report that a qualified lawyer, Mr. Mohsen Jahandar, had been accused of defending prisoners before Revolutionary Committees, condemned to death and shot before a firing squad at about the end of August, 1981;
--the Revolutionary Tribunals turned to trying cases which were not within their jurisdiction as defined in their penal system, including charges of homosexuality, prostitution, adultery, simple theft and drinking alcohol. Sentences of death by firing squad or by stoning were imposed for homosexuality, prostitution and adultery; the cutting off of a hand for simple theft.
The IRI not only misused its own jurisdiction, but justified violence in the streets on the highest authority. On September 19, 1981, in an address broadcast on radio and television, Ayatollah Moussavi, Revolutionary Procurator General, stated that “to kill the people who stand against this regime and its just Imam (Khomeini) is a prescribed duty according to Islamic laws. If they are captured, our men will not let them eat and sleep for a few months. The trial of these people is in the streets. I also order the city prosecutors to do the same; otherwise they themselves will be punished” (8).
On the same day, Ayatollah Mohammadi Gillani, the Ghazi Shara’ of Tehran (Tehran’s Islamic Judge), stated at a press conference in Evin Prison, “Islam permits people engaged in armed demonstrations in the streets to be captured, stood against the wall of the street and shot”.
The highlight of repression begins with the Bill of Retribution, a series of articles degrading the worth of a man's life to100 camels or 200 cows and that of a woman to half of the man's, 50 camels or 100 cows. It was the beginning of judicial violation of all standards of Human Rights.
In January, 1981, the Bill of Retribution was submitted to Parliament, mandating stoning, amputation of limbs and gouging out of eyes as punishments. This bill was developed by the Supreme Leader’s Judicial Council. In some cities, the clergy did not wait for legal sanction but had already begun to practice Islamic Justice on their own.
Public response was initially muted by disbelief, which gave way to a horrified outcry. Progressive analyses of the Bill were circulated. Organisations of religious minorities, women and other democratic people demonstrated at the Department of Justice and at Parliament but were met with silence. Then, in September 1981, the Bill was passed.
The Bill assumes that the human body and its parts are convertible into money. The idea of receiving blood money is based on this kind of assumption. Here the class nature of this bill is revealed; it serves only the rich. Only they can afford to pay fines for their crimes in lieu of physical punishment. The following descriptions show how this barbaric bill can return our society to the Dark Ages:
--the Bill ignores that the goal of punishment is the rehabilitation of the individual and society. It defines punishment as individual retaliation. The social aspect of crimes is completely neglected so that punishment becomes a right of the next of kin, or the private plaintiff. This symbolises a return to a tribal age when feuds were the custom (ARTICLE 7);
--in this bill, the value of a woman is assumed to be half that of a man. In a case of voluntary manslaughter, her testimony has no value. In the case of the murder of a woman by a man, the family of the woman must pay the murderer half of his blood money before retaliating. Otherwise there will be no punishment; he merely has to pay the blood money of the woman, which is half that of a man; (ARTICLE 5)
--murder committed in the line of duty still demands retaliation, thus, if a commander orders his soldier or police officer to kill someone, the one who was compelled to follow the orders of the commander can be sentenced to death, while the commander will be only sentenced to imprisonment; (ARTICLE 4)
--according to the Bill, it is permissible to kill one’s child. In other words, if the father or paternal grandfather murders his child, even if the child is fifty years old, he will be exempt from retaliation; (ARTICLE 6)
--according to the Bill, people can be killed for insulting the prophet or the saints and the murderer will be exempt from the punishment. (ARTICLE23)
--this Article is a tool for the suppression of all those who politically or ideologically oppose the IRI;
--according to the Bill, if a person is sentenced to several penalties, all the penalties will be carried out. For example, if the penalty includes whipping and stoning to death, the assailant will be whipped first and then stoned to death; (ARTICLE 110)
--the Bill, in many of its articles, discriminates against the non-Muslim citizens of Iran, relegating their rights to half or even less than those of Muslim citizens. (ARTICLES 100, 151)
--according to the Bill, a man can murder his wife and her companion in the case of adultery. He will not be punished;
--the code does not provide any punishment in case of murder of an individual who is mentally ill;
--the sentence for consuming alcohol for the first time is whipping. However, the third time that a person is accused of drinking alcohol; he will be sentenced to death;
The Bill of Retribution states that all the penalties should be implemented in public. The Islamic Judge should notify the public of the time of the event. It is necessary that at least three Muslims be present during the ceremonies;
--in all cases, guilt is proven through confession or the testimony of witnesses. It is enough for two Islamic Committee members or Revolutionary Guards to falsely testify against a person to endanger his life;
--by emphasising confession as a means of proving guilt, the Bill paves the way for torturing individuals in order to force them to confess;
--according to the Bill, married men and women will be stoned to death for adultery. The sentence will be implemented with full medieval ceremony. (ARTICLE 100)
The Bill describes the penalty as follows: “The man up to his waist and the woman up to her chest will be placed in a ditch and then stoned. The stones should neither be too big nor too small. ”Big stones kill too quickly.
It is important to note that the Bill, in many cases, is in conflict with the Constitution that was ratified by the same ruling organs! The Bill explicitly violates: Article 14 of the Constitution, which obliges the government and its Muslim citizens to deal fairly with non-Muslim citizens and to observe their Constitutional rights; Article 19, which states that Iranian people of any tribe or sect have equal rights, and that colour, race, language, gender, will not be reasons for withholding privileges; and Article 20 which guarantees all Iranian citizens, both men and women, equality under the Constitution.
References:
1) Human Rights Violations in the Republic of Iran, Chicago, 11, May 1980.
2) Imam Khomeini, „The revolutionary line”, Great Islamic Library.
3) Time Magazine, 20, September 1981.
4) International Herald Tribune, 30, September 1981
5) Giam Iran newspaper, Tehran, 28, June 1981.
6) ICJ Review No.26, p.23.
7) See ICJ Review No.25, at p.21.
8) Kayhan newspaper, Tehran, 20, September 1981.
| Recently by Jahanshah Rashidian | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Journée Internationale des Femmes | - | Mar 08, 2010 |
| Stop Indian Gasoline for Mullahs’ Repressive Machinery | 13 | Feb 04, 2010 |
| Iran Fails United Opposition | 5 | Jan 20, 2010 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
To Jamshid (re: Unfair comparison)
by Esmall (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 05:10 PM PSTI also disagree with you. Don't you think the same method of political destruction would work in any nation? It did in Guatemala, El Salvador, Chli, etc. So we have to keep in mind who the culprits are.
The situation is like a child who is directed to become say a thief. Although the analogy cannot be extended too much, but it is clear that the outcome should be blamed on the perpetrator, rather than the child. In the case of Iran US government is the perpeterator.
re: islamo-fachism
by Anonymous7 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 05:02 PM PSTanonym1 says: "There are many criminals in the US. These are individuals, groups of people engaged in criminal enterprises, against the law, including those in the military. Those who were caught have been and are being punished."
Perhaps they eventually get caught, but they sure do a lot of damage before they get caught. For example they start an illegal and criminal war (Iraq war) by manipulating the whole world!
Re: Unfair comparision
by jamshid on Fri Dec 21, 2007 05:00 PM PSTI disagree with you. You want to blame everything on some foreign power. This is the "dayee jan napoleon" desease that most of us Iranians are suffering from. It only contributes to a state of paralisis and helplessness.
The events of 1953 were supported by the US, but it was carried out by Iranians, not by CIA operatives or the US military inside Iran. The US had a role, but we Iranians did it. If you want to blame anyone, blame those who staged the coup (Iranians), and those who brought Iran to the brink of tajzieh, Mosadegh and company, again Iranians. Blame it to opportunist Tudeh party and the sellout mollahs, also Iranian. Also blame it to the unaware and uneducated masses who makes dumb choices, again Iranians . So overall we Iranians had a 99% blame.
We have to collectively take responsibility for the ills of our country. I mean why the same is not true with Spain, or South Korea?
To Jamshid and Rosie T: An unfair comparison
by . . (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 04:42 PM PSTJamshid,
Although your points are generally valid but you keep forgetting the template that was set for Iran beginning with the coup in 1953. When people are denied of their democratic and free choice and imposed on a CIA asshole who has no interest of the nation in mind, and prolong that for a generation, then you have what we have in Iran -- a mess. That is we have today's bunch of incompetents who even if they wanted to but are unable to do anything useful for the iranian nation. Of course on the top of that you should add the continuation of US government's acts of sabotage during the critical period of iranian revolution and the aftermath of that. With that, I mean their support for MKO in assasinations, separatist movements, minority agitation, etc., and killing of those nationalists and knowldgable iranians who were involved in advancing the revolution, and would be able to help the nation in terms of directing it on the right track. If you put all that together, you find out that we are in a bad shape (governmentally -- IRI), but the fault is not all ours. US government had and still has a big role in our desparation. That is why we should not forget their crimes (whether involved in physical killing of iranians, torture, etc. or political destruction of a nation -- which is a crime by itself). Those who forget the history are bound to repeat it.
Islamo-fascism
by Anonymous1 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 04:23 PM PSTRosie T.
There are many criminals in the US. These are individuals, groups of people engaged in criminal enterprises, against the law, including those in the military. Those who were caught have been and are being punished. There are even interest groups and corporate entities that promote policies clearly against the national interest of US. Barring some of the recent negative trends, there is still a system of checks and balances that is meant to preserve individual liberties and justice against all criminal persons, entities and the state. There is always recourse and remedy in US law.
Nowhere in the US, or the rest of the world for that matter, will you find barbarism like the Islamic laws, particularly Islamic Bill of retribution as it is outlined above. This criminality is imposed from above. These crimes are not just committed by individual criminals, but are state laws. Also, you can argue specific articles in Islamic law (bill of retribution) suggest the legality of mass murder, or genocide. There is no comparison between the two countries. When you are wronged by the criminal system in IRI, there is no recourse or remedy. Every item in the Islamic bill of retribution law is against universal human rights declarations that are accepted by just about everyone in the world.
well said Rosie
by Anonymous7 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 04:09 PM PSTThe fact is that there are fascist elements in many countries and governments including US, IRI, and Israeli governments but neither of those governmets are "fascist" or "ultra fascist".
Problem starts when one tries to brand a whole government or nation as fascist Islamo-fascist etc. That inevitably leads to exaggeration.
To Jamshid
by Rosie T. on Fri Dec 21, 2007 03:35 PM PSTIn general I agree with you about the US not being specifically FASCISTIC to its citizens (other depredations yes, but GENERALLY fascistic, no, Bush tried to do that and failed), but I do see the US as having a history of fascistic behavior in OTHER countries. And now this mess in Iraq and Afghanistan...I don't know WHAT to call it but it AIN'T good...and I don't make distinctions between attrocities perpetrated on those within or without a polity. People are people and the responsible governments are responsible. I truly believe they are two VERY dangerous regimes.
And I keep reminding people, or trying to, that majority of UN members want to abolish capital punishment (because it hasn't WORKED these five thousand years of "civilization") and a coalition of mostly Shariah countries keeps hamstringing these efforts, and it is led by Bush's US, IRI and mainland China.
And that to me pretty much says it all....
Re: Rosie T
by jamshid on Fri Dec 21, 2007 03:17 PM PSTRight on the money Rosie. Khomeini prolonged the war for seven more years, resulting in a million death and millions more maimed, homelessed and orphaned.
The US is imperialist in natrue, but it is not fascistic and murderous towards its own citizens. The IRI is. Beleive me, if anyone live in Iran and then live in the US, he or she will choose the US hands down. Many of the pro-IRI assholes in this site are living in the US while bragging about life in Iran.
To the last three posters:
by Rosie T. on Fri Dec 21, 2007 03:01 PM PSTIs it possible that the crimes of the US government and the IRI when taking the history of the past 30 years into account perhaps parallel each other if not in magnitude, at least in severity in certain situations? I think of Khomeini intentionally prolongng the war when Saddam wanted the UN to broker a peace...this was very very serious. Does it REALLY pale before Bush in Iraq? I mean, one million dead....for NOTHING, nothing at all? Except to consolidate his own power base...that is not my opinon, it's the opinion of UN reports after the war finally ended with no winners, only losers.
And don't anyone even go there and start to call me a CIA or Zionist agent. I'm the one who calls the US the United States of a Murderer, etc., etc. So don't even go there. If this site is being monitored, I'm on the US government's shit/hit list as much as anyone else here may be...maybe even more....
So I want to know if it is possible to live with paradox...to live with the DISCOMFORT that living with paradox brings...is itpossible...because reality is NOT as simple as we would like it to be....is it possible that BOTH the US government (yes, yes, yes, and their henchman Israel, too) AND the IRI government really, truly SUCK?
IRI genocide and Islamo-fascism
by Anonymous1 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 02:45 PM PSTGo find another forum for decrying other types of fascism. This one belongs to IRI, past and present. IRI crimes that are summarized above fit the definition of genocide and fascism to a T.
necons =? fascists (Re: Fox news imitator )
by Anonymous2 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 02:05 PM PSTIf any political entity in today's world has an ideology that comes very close to fascism is the political force led by neocon/AIPAC in the US.
The wrongdoings of IRI do not even compare to the neocon/AIPAc crimes against humanity. They have very well documented resume in Iraq and elsewhere. So don’t regurgitate terminologies that even CNN does not repeat.
IRI = Genocidal = Islamo-Fascist
by Anonymous1 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 01:04 PM PSTThere should not even be a debate whether IRI is an Islamo-fascist state. There is nothing exaggerated, if anything these crimes are underreported in Mr. Rashidian's article. Some of the key confessions about these crimes comes from the criminal Islamists themselves, and through their own (sensored) media (check out reference 8). Besides the genocide of the past, they imposed these barbaric laws that are being practiced today, against all human rights conventions and obligations that Iran is has signed. What more do you need ?
not sure
by not sure (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:29 PM PSTnot sure what the hell is going on??
All talk, all opinion, I know best, I have the solution and answers to practically anything,
if only!!
By the way, what happened to Ghotbzadeh???
Re: Anonymous7.7
by jamshid on Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:29 PM PSTI stated my explanation as to why the IRI is fascist. You have failed to counter my argument with anything meaningful. Instead you just give sho'aar.
There is nothing further to discuss with you.
So IRI is not that bad (Re: Jamshid)
by Anonymous1.77 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:04 PM PSTJamshid said the day before yesterday: "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems."
Jamshid says today : “So IRI is not just a fascist government, but an "ultra" fascist government...You failed to prove the IRI is not fascist.”
No Jamshidjan you need to prove that IRI is fascist, not only that, you need to prove that IRI is ultra fascist!
The proverb says “the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it”. Now you can keep exaggerating as much as you want, you can cal IRI “ultra fascist”, “super fascist”, “ultra premium super fascist” but that does not change that fact.
P.S#7 Religious Leaders Call for Talks With Iran
//www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/20brfs-minist...
P.S#7.1 It is our job to continue criticizing social and economical injustice (big divide between the rich poor) under IRI. However we don't need to exaggerate the bad and ignore the good.
PS#7.2 It is your lucky day Jamshid, I am off and can post more, happy holiday
Re: Anonymous1.7
by jamshid on Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:08 AM PSTThe same was true about Nazi Germany. All its neighboring countries "realized" that they should "work" with the Nazis. Then war happened and Germany lost. The same will happen with the IRI. And that will ruin Iran even more. Therefore the IRI must be overthrown.
You keep using my statement in which I said Iranian moslems are the most tolerant. You use this statement to prove that I contradict myself when I claim the IRI is fascist. I think what you don't understand is that (and I am saying this for the nth time) THE IRI IS NOT EQUAL TO "IRANIAN MOSLEMS". THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT AND DISTINCT AND OPPOSTIE ENTITIES. Can you comprehend and grasp the sentence in upper case?
It means that while the Iranian people are indeed more tolerant than in other countries, the IRI is the opposite and completely intolerant.
You failed to prove the IRI is not fascist. In my last post, I used the definition of "fascist" and the similarities of that definition to the IRI ideology to prove that IRI is fascist. However, you have failed to counter my proof. You just keep repeating that "IRI is not fascist". You saying this constitutes neither proof nor evidence. You must do better than this.
So IRI is not that bad ..... (Re: Jamshid)
by Anonymous1.7 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:47 AM PSTJamshid said the day before yesterday: "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems."
Jamshid says today : “So IRI is not just a fascist government, but an "ultra" fascist government.”
Jamshidjan, absolute majority of the world does not buy either of those theories, Rashidian’s IRI fascist theory or your ultra fascist IRI theory. In fact the world is realizing more and more that it can, and it should work with Iranians/IRI:
//www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/20brfs-minist...
To Akbar Shelakhteh:
by Rosie T. on Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:22 AM PSTPlease read my long post under the December 20 Iranian of the Day "Brilliant Physicist" entry detailing my history vis a vis the Zionist question, and also the long post below on this thread, in response to "What Gives" regarding my ideological stance in general.
Please read both posts carefully and think about them, and when you have, inform me on this thread that you have done so and then I will be perfectly happy to engage in a discussion with you on this topic.
Best regards,
Robin Goldsmith
Re: Anonymous1.77... More safsateh...
by jamshid on Fri Dec 21, 2007 08:46 AM PSTOk. Let's say someone slapped you on the face 200 times a day because he is intolerant towards you. But today he slaps you only 150 times a day. You call this becoming more tolerant? It is the same way with the IRI. Who are you trying to deceive?
Are you are so short in having convincing reasons that you have to dig under any rocks for any, ANY, pathetic proof that the IRI has become more tolerant? the IRI is executing innocent people on a daily basis. BUT they are not executing thousands in only one day like they used to.
YUPPIE! BRAVO! Everyone, I have good news for you! The IRI has become more TOLERANT! It does not kill by the thousands per day, but only by the dozens! VOW! What a progress in tolerance!
You either are a defender of the IRI which automatically makes you a traitor to Iran, or if you are not pro-IRI, then the IRI has succeeded to lower your expectations and make a very small person out of you. IRI does want its citizens to be this way.
IRI is fascist. Because it is authoritarian government that exercise an absolute control on the economical, social and religious aspects of its citizens. It is an "ultra" fascist form of government since it applies its absolute power to control the most minute aspect of its citizens' lives, such as what to wear. Not even Nazis went that far.
So IRI is not just a fascist government, but an "ultra" fascist government.
It is also parasatic because it lives in a "host", which is Iran, and obtains nourishment from the host without giving any benefits to the host while causing great damage to the host.
Then you say that "unlike Pahlavi regime, IRI has been relying on ordinary Iranians for its survival..." Another false statement. ALL governments, including the pahlavis, rely on its ordinary citizens to survive. This also includes the USA, the Soviets and the Romans.
Our job should not be limited to criticizing the IRI, it should also cover its overthrow as soon as possible, unless you want foreign powers to eventually attack Iran.
Happy holidays to you too.
so IRI is not that bad.... (Re: Jamshid)
by Anonymous1.77 (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 07:30 AM PSTJamshid says: "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems"
Jamshid, extremists anti IRI people do not understand that during past 28 years, Iranians ( Moslems, non-Moslems, and those in IRI regime) have gone through growing pains.
Many in all sides, those who have supported IRI consistently and those who have not supported IRI have grown. Majority of Iranians and IRI have become more tolerant and pragmatic.
Of course there are those of us like Mr. Rashidian who have made some fundamentally wrong assumptions such as claiming that IRI is "fascist" or "parasite"; and insist on sticking with those ideas.
However the realities of Iran, one of which you mentioned above is in direct contradiction with "fascist" IRI theory, "parasite" theory, etc.
(so Mr. Rashidian exaggerates the problems in Iran to fit the reality to his theories).
By the way Jamshid as you know, unlike Pahlavi regime, IRI has been relying on ordinary Iranians for its survival. At some point absolute majority supported IRI, these days IRI clearly does not enjoy that, nevertheless it still relies on Iranians for its survival.
P.S#1 It is our job to continue criticizing social and economical injustice (big divide between the rich poor) under IRI. However we don't need to exaggerate the bad and ignore the good.
PS#2 Happy Hollidays!
PS#3 Take it easy Jamshid!
Rosie T answer the questions ....
by Akbar Shelakhteh (not verified) on Fri Dec 21, 2007 07:24 AM PSTWhy are you so worried about "killings" under IRI and not even a bit by the Palestinan CHILDREN's killings committed by your masters in Tel Aviv? Even if they were not your masters, by the token that you and them have the same religion, you should be outraged. Why aren't you? Respond please.
Rosie T. Grand Wizard of the Zionist KKK Speaks
by Rosie T. on Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:27 PM PSTI refer you Aghdas Behaya to my long reply to a claim similar to yours, which documents my numerous Zionist activities beginning in 1982 when I worked with the Arab Students Organization of the University of Pennsylvvania which had loose ties with the PLO in response to the massacres at Sabra and Shatila, up to the present day. It is posted under the December 20 Iranian of the Day entry entitled "Brilliant Physicist" but it has nothing to do with physics, about which I know very little and you no doubt know even less. I warn you, though, it is long. I hope you find the attention span to read it.
When you are done, please ssupply documentation of Mr. Rashidian's MKO activities. I have repeatedly requested it but all I get in return is claims that I am a Zionist agent. (When they use profanity, I flag them for deletiion). Perhaps yu can do better than your predecessors.
Robin Jayne Goldsmith
PS I hope you are not the same person who asked me the same "what gives?" below on this thread because I wrote a very long clear reply and if you are the same person, you are clearly insane.
So Mr. J. Rashidian, you are ............
by Aghdas Behaya (not verified) on Thu Dec 20, 2007 08:29 PM PSTMr Rashidian,
So, rumors has it that your were/are/will be a member of MKO and also have other hostory of anti-iranian activities (not just anti IRI, but anti-Iranian). With all that, why should anyone believe what you have got to say? All the stat you are pulling are being questioned (and deleted by censor knife of Mr JJ and his "moderators"), and many of the comments written to pose quations to you were deleted qs well. The character Rosie T who defended you is a zionist who supports anyone who has something negative to say about IRI, whether true or not. So what gives? Enlighten us please.
Re: Anonymous1.7
by jamshid on Thu Dec 20, 2007 08:20 AM PSTLet's examine some of the things you said in your last post.
The statement I wrote from which you are making your two implications was this:
"I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems..."
You made two implications out of the above statemenet (according to yourself):
Implication#1: Assumption of extremist critics of IRI such as Mr. Rashidian that IRI is a fascist state is wrong...
Now, how in the world could this sentence: "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems" imply that IRI is fascist? (not that it isn't)
Implication#2: neocon/AIPAC should leave Iran alone....
Again, what in the world does "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems" have ANYTHING to do with necons/AIPAC???
Could you explain how did you extract these implication from my statement?
P.S.#1 Don't keep saying the Iranian "people" are more tolerant. We are NOT talking about the people, we are talking about the IRI.
P.S.#2: Repeat 10 times: "Iranian people" is not equal to IRI. Now repeat 10 times more.
P.S #3: Do you see your fallacy here?
So IRI is not that bad afterall... (Re: Jamshid)
by Anonymous1.7 (not verified) on Thu Dec 20, 2007 07:10 AM PSTJamshid says: "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems."
Jamshidjan(*) you just answered my question by using the word "fallacy" over and over again. Let me explain to you 2 implication of your statement in a simpler way:
1- Assumption of extremist critics of IRI such as Mr. Rashidian that IRI is a fascist state is wrong. It further explains his exaggerations, i.e, he exaggerates the issues in Iran to force IRI into his "fascist" and "parasite" theories.
2- neocon/AIPAC should leave Iran alone and stop their agressions agains IRI, bcause the most intolerant moslems are not in Iran but elsewhere.
P.S#1 I agree with you that religious minorities were treated better by Pahlavi regime. Specially mistreatment of Bahaies is one of the darkest spots in IRI's record. However I believe Iranian moslems are now more tolerant of Bahaies than before.
P.S#2 It is our job to continue criticize social and economical injustice (big divide between the rich poor) under IRI. However we don't need to exaggerate the bad and ignore the good.
* I hope you are ok with the jan suffix
Re: Anonymous1.7
by jamshid on Wed Dec 19, 2007 08:23 PM PSTYour ideology being so bankrupt, you are resorting to sophistry. How pathetic.
On to exposing your fallacy:
Yes, I did say Iranians are most tolerant moslems. From this, you concluded, on my behalf, that therefore "during IRI's rein (of 28 years) Iranian moslems have become the most tolerant moslems..."
The fallacy of your conclusion lies in the fact that you are concluding (on your own and falsely on my behalf) that Iranians were NOT tolerant moslems before the IRI, and after 28 years of exposure to the IRI, they have now become tolerant.
First, I did not say that. Second, you cannot make such conclusion from my previous statements. Third, the statement of your conclusion is totally false to begin with.
So you are taking my statement, mix it with fallacy, and create a false conclusion that on its own is a false statement.
Then using this falsely derived conclusion, you say that I am discrediting Rashidian's articles.
Wow! The only thing I can tell you is that you have wayyyyys to go before you can defeat me in an argument by resorting to fallacy and sophistry.
P.S. The proof that Iranians were actually MORE tolerant before the IRI is the treatment of the religious minorities, including Bahais during the reign of the pahlavis.
so IRI is not that bad after all (Re: Jamshid)
by Anonymous1.7 (not verified) on Wed Dec 19, 2007 07:18 PM PSTJamshid says: "I am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems."
Jamshid, do you know the ramification of your statement? Optimistically one can conclude that during IRI's rein (of 28 years) Iranian moslems have become the most tolerant moslems. Pesimistcally one can conclude that despite IRI's rein, Iranian moslems remain the most tolerant.
Either way that shows that IRI has not been that bad afterall. As I mentioned to you I am of the opinion that Iranian Moslems, including those who support IRI have become more tolerant during past 28 years.
Jamshid your statement discredits many of past and present articles of Rashidian.
Re: Anonym7.1
by jamshid on Wed Dec 19, 2007 03:00 PM PSTI am well aware of Iranians being the most tolerant moslems. But Iranians' account is different than the IRI's. They are not the same thing. IRI is the emobodiment of intolerance.
You dodge the other issues brought up in this article about the IRI by changing the subject.
P.S. The reason why I don't mind your mocking me by calling me "jamshidak" instead of "jamshid" is because more than any thing I may write to expose you, it exposes your character and therefore your opinion, not to mention your lack of "tolerance" which in turn demonstrates your hypocrisy.
Re: flagging/moderaton
by Rosie T. on Wed Dec 19, 2007 02:39 PM PSTAs I said before I have brought this thread to the attention of the publisher and moderators as a sensitive one highly susceptible to verbal abuse. I am flagging posts which are highly verbally abusive as I always do regardless of whom they are directed to, and have encouraged others to do so as well. Don't expect such posts to remain here, they won't. Period. As you can see from the discussion below heated debates can occur which do not cross a certain line. Grow up.
Justice
by Mona (not verified) on Wed Dec 19, 2007 09:56 AM PSTWhen perfect justice reigns in every country of the Eastern and Western World, then will the earth become a place of beauty. The dignity and equality of every servant of God will be acknowledged; the ideal of the solidarity of the human race, the true brotherhood of man, will be realized; and the glorious light of the Sun of Truth will illumine the souls of all men.
Equality and Brotherhood must be established among all members of mankind. This is according to Justice. The general rights of mankind must be guarded and preserved.All men must be treated equally.