Retrial for girl due to hang for killing rapist.

[Dammit Ann]

A 19-year-old girl sentenced to death by hanging in Iran last year is to be retried on Wednesday after a Canadian singer launched an international campaign to save her.

Nazanin Fatehi was sentenced to death a year ago, on 3 January 2006, after admitting having stabbed to death one of three men who tried to rape her and a 16-year-old relative. She was 17 at the time.

continued...
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132568.ece

I cannot ignore this.

[superconnected]

1. I can't either. Yet some people here think the US and Iraq are

par for the way they charge and hange people becuase of capital punnishment in the US.

Per capita and reaon for the capital punishment, comparision, aren't even close.

[MADem]

17. This did not happen in Arab IRAQ. It happened in Persian, Totalitarian IRAN

I get a little flummoxed everytime I see people on this message board cheering for the repressive government in IRAN, chortling because the asshole figurehead president of that nation rattles his little sabre at the asshole we have running our country. They don't have a clue how shitty Iran is when it comes to human rights. Hangings? They hang people all the time, and not from a scaffold--they drive a fucking CRANE into the public square and dangle the victims from it. And they just LOOOOVE executing little girls for "chastity" crimes. It's stomach turning.

The pop singer and former Miss Canada Nazanin Afshin-Jam learnt of her case and has since become the figurehead of the campaign to have her freed. "The injustice of the story horrified me," said Ms Afshin-Jam, the runner-up to the 2003 Miss World title who left Iran when she was two. "I couldn't believe that a victim of attempted rape was being charged as a criminal."

According to the Iranian daily newspaper Etemaad, Ms Fatehi and her niece were in a park in Karaj, just outside of Tehran, with their boyfriends when they were approached by three men. The boys fled after the men pushed the girls to the floor. Ms Fatehi then drew a knife and stabbed one man in the arm and another in the chest, killing him.

If she had allowed the men to rape her and her niece, the girls would have been subjected to 100 lashes under Iranian laws on chastity. If they had been married at the time they were raped they would likely have been found guilty of adultery and sentenced to death by stoning.

Ms Afshin-Jam, said: "Nazanin didn't have an option, she didn't have a voice so I was going to try and be that voice for her."

Since she took up the case last year, 232,492 signatures have been delivered to the Iranian government, and a trust fund set up which has enabled Ms Fatehi to have access to one of the best lawyers in the country. The young woman's sentence was stayed in June last year and a retrial ordered. The first stage of this was held last August, and the case continues on Wednesday. If it upholds the first verdict, it will need to be approved formally by Iran's Supreme Court.

Under Iranian law, self-defence is a valid defence in a murder trial, but its application depends largely on the circumstances. Negar Azmudeh, a Canadian lawyer who has previously spoken out on Ms Fatehi's case, said that the fact that she and her niece were in a park in the evening may have some bearing on whether the defence is considered valid.

Ms Azmudeh cited a case where a woman was prosecuted for injuring her boss as he tried to rape her at work: "Because she had showed up at work on a Friday they could not claim 'self-defence' because her presence at the office on a Friday when she knew the boss was there constituted her 'invitation' to be raped.".....

Read this, and be sickened: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5217424.stm

[madeline_con]

19. The crane was discussed recently by my mother and me....

we decided the reason must be visibility. Everyone who wants to witness the hangings can get a good view of goings on. :puke:

[MADem]

21. You are right. It's visibility AND portability.

Rather than, like in the old days, they'd hang people in specified areas (there used to be a gallows in southern Teheran in years past) now they can do it anywhere they please, and ensure that the message gets out to the locals who actually knew the accused/convicted. It's a simple matter to bring the executioner to YOUR hometown!! Roll a drott crane into any public square, have the religious police beat the bushes for a crowd, and next thing ya know, you've got an "event" to serve as a chilling warning to others. Sick bastards, they are...

[madeline_con]

29. They Mutawas used to round people up in Saudi Arabia...

when there was a stoning or beating to be witnessed. Anyone on the street was expected to attend. This was during the 70's. I doubt if it's changed much.

[Strelnikov_]

45. "people on this message board cheering for the repressive government in IRAN"

Example, please.

"chortling because the asshole figurehead president of that nation rattles his little sabre"

Example, please.

Yes, they have a repressive government that does not recognize most of the human rights that we do.

You seem to feel strongly about them, so what is your solution?

[Superman Returns]

49. I've seen examples

after the 60 minutes interview, many were complimenting Ahmenajad as a voice of reason, especially being supportive of his anti-Bush views. I even remember some of the DU members who made the comments, but I choose not to start problems. I distinctly remember telling people just because the guy is anti-Bush doesn't mean we should support him, considering his polices are the anthisesis of liberalism.

[Strelnikov_]

50. So They Were "Cheering The repressive Government In Iran"

or "chortling because the asshole figurehead president of that nation rattles his little sabre "

Were they?

From what I remember of the comments regarding that interview, they mainly revolved around how he appears to be more articulate and composed (ie: not a madman) like the Reich media portrays.

A few ill-informed or ill-advised comments does not 'many' make.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mike Daniels]

55. I don't have access to archives but I can back his account

There is a small but vocal segment of DU that will pile accolades on any repressive leader who utters the slightest criticism of Bush under some wacked-out interpretation of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

That most people living under the rule of those leaders would leap at a chance to get either rid of the leader or get themselves the hell out of the country doesn't register with this group.

[superconnected]

33. Sorry, typo. I mean Iran. I was very tired last night but absolutely

knew the difference.

Didn't realize I wrote iraq until this morning.

[MADem]

40. Look on the bright side--at least you do know the difference.

It's more than the Monkey can say, I fear.

I wonder if he even realizes that Iranians aren't Arabs, yet?

[Richard Steele]

2. Convicted of "HEROISM without a penis", and sentenced to die for it.

Y'know, I try to be "PC". I try to understand
the POV of people from other places, other ways
of life.

But the fact is, alot of people from other cultures
are just as mentally fucked up as the US citizens
who voted for B*sh twice.

And this bullshit is just flat-out WRONG.

If she had a male relative present, and HE had done the
stabbing to prevent the rape of the 2 young ladies,
he'd be a local hero.

But since she had to fend off 3 rapists herself, she's sentenced to die.
Because her "culture" considers a truly good woman to be less human
than a truly bad man.

It's events like this that help me understand why the FReepers
fall back onto their "kill 'em all" solution so goddamn often.

[Dammit Ann]

5. exactly.

these are strange times. clashes of culture are always fraught with these choices. do we side with the "evildoers" or do we try to find a balance or do we bomb them and watch the world fall apart? no easy answers... but, as thinkers there SHOULD be an easier resolution than "kill 'em all". too bad the freepers, and our CIC (chimp in chief) can't see past their own dicks, cheney, i mean.

[Richard Steele]

8. Thanks for putting that paragraph together. You state things well.

It's very late here, and I've been swigging at
my latest batch of homemade kitty-litter wine
for a few hours...

And this kind of story REALLY just makes me
want to run amok with sharp objects, y'know?
Kinda hard to express thoughts through the
thick fog of RAGE that clouds my sight when
I hear shit like this.

You said what I was trying to say, only better.
Betcha a nickel you're SOBER, right?
Good for you.

BTW, welcome to DU! (I like your username- way better than mine.)

[Dammit Ann]

9. not sober.

but i've always been at my best after a few... (long time on and off barmaid) i just think things are not as easily solved as we would sometimes wish, hence, booze. no, seriously, we just have to get over ourselves and deal with the world on their terms sometimes and within that, maybe there is compromise. who knows? maybe we all just THINK we hate each other?

your name totally ROCKS! are you kidding?


peace.

[Richard Steele]

10. Nope. Not kidding. I wasn't clever enough to come up with a cool username.

My name is Richard Steele, my friends call me "Dick"; when I first found DU
I signed up under my real name, temporarily, until I came up with
a really cool net-name that would be as good as the ones that people
here on DU had.

Almost 11 thousand posts later, I still got NUTHIN.
Still using my real name until I come up with a truly cool
username net-handle nom-de-tubes, knowhutImean?

of course, it's kinda nice that my real name is so silly-
kinda like "hiding in plain sight", as far as the illusion
of web-anonymity goes, eh?

[Dammit Ann]

11. fantastic.

really, GREAT name! actually, my name is ann and one of my mother's favorite expressions while i was growing up was damnit, ann, (fill in the blanks). so, as i got older it became an affectionate nickname and stuck and now, here i am. lemons to lemonade, baby.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. Lose/Lose.

Had she been raped (it appears she was able to fight them off), then she may have suffered the same fate, more than likly at the hands of her family. Though, that is not always the case.

[Kutjara]

4. For me, it's another reminder that the "disease"...

...is not being Muslim or Christian or Jewish, not being American or Iraqi or Timbuktuan, not being black or white or asian. The disease is being human, and we're all afflicted.

I'm not optimistic about a cure.

[Dammit Ann]

6. that is the cure.

KNOWING what we are and fighting the compulsion to be that barbaric. EVOLUTION is not easy, but we are obviously capable.

[w4rma]

7. This retrial could set a very good precident for women in Iran.

It could also set a very bad one if the ruling is against her.

[DeSwiss]

12. Also from the article:

"If she had allowed the men to rape her and her niece, the girls would have been subjected to 100 lashes under Iranian laws on chastity. If they had been married at the time they were raped they would likely have been found guilty of adultery and sentenced to death by stoning.

<snip>

Under Iranian law, self-defence is a valid defence in a murder trial, but its application depends largely on the circumstances. Negar Azmudeh, a Canadian lawyer who has previously spoken out on Ms Fatehi's case, said that the fact that she and her niece were in a park in the evening may have some bearing on whether the defence is considered valid. Ms Azmudeh cited a case where a woman was prosecuted for injuring her boss as he tried to rape her at work: "Because she had showed up at work on a Friday they could not claim 'self-defence' because her presence at the office on a Friday when she knew the boss was there constituted her 'invitation' to be raped."

<snip>

Under Iranian law, the value of a man's life is twice as great as that of a woman. "A man who had killed a woman could not get the death penalty unless the victim's family paid him a female person's worth of dieh," Ms Azmdeh said. "This way, the victim's life plus the amount of dieh, would be equal to a full person, ie, a man's life."

*** - Now let me make sure I've got this right, 100 lashes = one rape (single); one rape victim = stoning to death (married); 1 woman = 1/2 man; going to work (while female) = invitation to be raped by boss. And since she didn't get raped, she now has the prospect before her to become one of 72 virgins for some idiot who blew himself up in a car. Peachy.

Okay. I think is see why people will risk their lives to come to the west. Here, everyone's life is worth the same. At least in theory.

[Hav]

14. .

This is some sick stuff...

[arcos]

13. K&R... come on people, let's get this to the top of the recommended list.... nt

[wellstone dem]

15. done

[brer cat]

16. done.

[Dammit Ann]

54. Thank you!

Sometimes i feel like I don't contribute anything of worth on here, but this story needs to be told. I appreciate your support in getting out the word. peace.

[Peace Patriot]

18. Beware of the "incubator babies"...

Prior to Gulf War I, a Washington PR firm touted the story that Iraqi troops in Kuwait unplugged the incubators of premature babies in a hospital. Everyone believed it--those beastly Iraqis!

It was completely untrue. It was part of a war propaganda campaign to stir up hatred of the "enemy."

I'm not saying that THIS story is untrue. It has the ring to truth. But I don't know. Really, I do not trust a single word, nor a single fact, from the establishment press.

And, in the current context, with the US naval fleet assembling in the Persian Gulf, and rumors of an Israeli nuclear strike on Iran, I would beware of any story that fosters hatred of Iranians.

And, say it's true--as it seems to be. What of the innocent people on death row all over the USA--the poor, the black, who cannot afford a decent defense? Is this any less horrendous than this awful law in Iran that considers women of less value, and punishes a woman both for being raped and for defending herself against rape?

Or what about the innocents in Afghanistan sold by warlords to the US army, blindfolded and flown half way round the world in horrendous conditions, to Guantanamo Bay, or to secret torture dungeons in unknown places? Is this any less horrendous than this case in Iran?

Or what of the children who were raped and tortured in Abu Ghraib? Or the hundred thousand innocents slaughtered in Iraq, in the initial bombing alone?

I am, of course, not against championing this young woman in Iran, and trying to save her life. I applaud it. I am appalled at their laws. But I know this, too, The US, the UK and Israel deliberately destroyed Iranian democracy in 1954, and inflicted the Iranian people with 25 years of torture and repression under the horrible Shah of Iran. WE pushed the Iranian people into the arms of the mullahs! So, the laws they have now--sharia law--are as much OUR doing as that of the mullahs. We support dictatorships throughout the Middle East. This is one of the reasons why the hanging of Saddam Hussein was such utter hypocrisy. WE put him in power. He was a CIA asset! Donald Rumsfled shook hands with him, and gave him the chemical weapons he used against Iranians and Kurds!

So, I urge you, in this time of extreme danger, with a psychotic in the White House, and war profiteers controlling policy, to beware of being used to foment hatred of Iran. There are terrible injustices all over the world, against woman and men and children--many of them committed by our own government. Beware of the equation of this outrage--against this Iranian woman--with "Iran" deserving to be bombed, or nuked, or invaded. Who will suffer the most if that happens? Who will be slaughtered? Who will be tortured? And who will be doing the slaughtering and torturing?

There are many reasons for hatred, on all sides. We must resist hatred. There are many injustices and flawed systems, democratic and otherwise. We must not use injustice as an excuse for war. We must work for the good, but we must never be self-righteous, because that way leads to injustices that boggle the mind, the torture of thousands, the deaths of millions.

I applaud the work of Canadian singer Nazanin Afshin-Jam in getting a retrial for Nazanin Fatehi and trying to free her--if it is an honest advocacy campaign, and I have no reason to believe that it is not, although I have to say that I reserve judgment on that, in view of the "incubator babies" and so many lies that have been told to justify horrendous violence in the Middle East against innocent people. She has gathered 232,492 signatures on a petition to the Iranian government, and has established a trust fund for Nazahin Fatehi's defense. It is the sort of thing that I would have done, if I had had some fame to spend on a good cause, and had heard of it. I am an older woman, and have lived through much myself--and this case outrages me. But I am also acutely aware of the CONTEXT of this news story. And I know our own history here--including an amendment to the Constitution that designated slaves as 2/3 of a human being, and our slaughter of Native Americans--and more recent atrocities, for instance, TWO MILLION Southeast Asians slaughtered by the US in the 1960s, and 200,0000 Mayan villagers slaughtered--raped, gutted, skinned alive, burned alive--with US assistance in Guatemala under Reagan--and now the horrors of Iraq, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. And I remember Laura Bush's utterly hypocritical "concern" for the rights of the women of Afghanistan, where the warlords are now back in charge, who are no kinder to women than the Taliban were. I remember, too, feeling angry and hateful toward the Taliban. But how many innocents have died because that kind of hatred is so easy for demagogues to stir up? How many of the Afghan women I felt sorry for are now dead from our bombs? How many of their children?

We do not live in a simplistic world, where it is easy to sort out right and wrong. Yes, if all the facts are true, this case is indeed a "wrong"--an egregious wrong. And I hope that Nazanin Afshin-Jam's campaign succeeds. All I am saying is beware of the hatred that leads to war. And be aware that yet more illegal, unjust war, in which many innocents will die, is imminent.

[madeline_con]

20. I agree, we need to use caution here...

I watched a show "Execution in Iran" (or a similar title) about a young girl who was hanged for adultery. Come to find out, one of the main players implicated in the trial supposedly ran a prostitution ring.

What struck me as odd was:

1. The way the girl's father didn't seem outraged that his daughter was supposedly raped repeatedly by a man who would pick her up in his car along the road.

2. That the girl was walking along the road in the first place, in such a suposedly strict culture.

:shrug:

[Pithlet]

22. Nothing struck me as odd.

She was 16 years old. They hoisted a 16 year old girl on a crane. She could have been dancing naked in the streets swirling tassels and holding out a tin cup, for all I care.

[Coventina]

23. Ignore the apologists for cruelty. These threads always bring them out.

Look for the old canard of "we're not perfect, so how can we judge?"

[MADem]

25. Christ, I thought I'd be alone again!!

Thank you for saying that. It drives me CRAZY when people assume that there can only be one shithead in the world. And seeing as Iran is only second to China in executions (and given the population difference, well, that's pretty telling there, ain't it?) I'd hardly call them an enlightened society on that score alone, never mind their treatment of women, children and dissidents.

My greatest sympathies are with the people over there--they really are swell folk, but they are living under a hideous, twisted regime. It's a shame, too, because so many of them had such profound hopes back in 79, which were swiftly dashed. See, Khomeini was like their George Bush, he campaigned in the center, and governed to the far right. The only difference was, once they made that horrid mistake and kicked the Shah out (and he was ready to cede a shitload of power to the people, too, at that point) and hauled the Ayatullah home from France, there was no going back. And there is still no going back, except by taking to the streets. They have no way out of their current system of government save revolution. It's a shame.

[Coventina]

35. I support your posts in this thread 100%. You are right in every respect.

Plus you have the "on the ground" experience to back what you say.

But I have to admit I have tired of debating the compassion-challenged around here.

Somehow some "progressives" think it's okay to sit back and watch a 16 year old young woman get hung for defending herself against rape. Why? Because our government has done bad things too.

:crazy:

I just don't have the time or energy to "debate" such a logical fallacy.

But I offer you my :hug: for your willingness to do it. You are doing a great job!

[MADem]

39. You have no idea how much it is appreciated.

This isn't the only subject for discussion that pleads for a bit of nuance! But as you say, if George Bush is BAD, then anyone who opposes him gets canonized as a saint in contrast, no matter what they or their regimes might have done. I get profoundly annoyed when the hanging of young girls (and boys) for crimes like insufficient chastity or homosexuality can be brushed aside as a cultural perogative simply because they like seeing a figurehead midget in Iran insulting the Monkey in the White House. They ignore the Persian Dunce's fucked-up "The Holocaust is Fake" conference, they ignore his treatment of reformers, of dissidents, of people who just want to walk in the park holding hands--it's absurd, how they can say "Oh, well" to stuff they wouldn't tolerate themselves for five minutes.

When I lived in Iran, men and women could socialize freely, dance together, have dinner together, SWIM together, wear normal looking bathing suits, chadors were optional (and the ladies knew when to wear them--like say, mosque visits or trips to holy cities), and you could get a drink at a bar if you wanted one. The middle class was small, but growing...until the revolution drew near, and then it shrunk in a hurry, along with the upper class--many of those folks booked to the US, and settled in TX, OK, and Little Teheran, Los Angeles, amongst other places. I've got Persian neighbors here in the not-so-chilly-as-usual northeast.

Nowadays, the society is segregated, the infrastructure is falling to shit, they are importing 40 percent of their gasoline because their refineries are crumbling, and the place is a goddamned mess. It's unfortunate, and I really feel for my friends who are still stuck there, and who can't afford to travel because the economy is so fucked up that the rial is, really, like toilet paper. It's a place that is ripe for revolution; and while I hope they do it on their own, without our "help" in any way, shape or form, I think that, no matter what their future holds, this sort of brutal repression and vicious, anti-human-rights version of "justice" that the government practices practice is just wrong, and shouldn't be ignored or excused or tolerated.

To me, that's a conservative argument, to not speak out when injustice is plain...and it stuns me when I see "Well, BUT..." arguments here.

[Midlodemocrat]

38. Yup.

No excuses, no rationale for executing a child.

They're barbaric.

[MADem]

26. Jesus H. Christ. She was a sixteen year old motherless child.

Her father was a goddamned HEROIN addict.

Her grandparents used her as a maid.

Ah, but it's HER fault that she was hanged from a crane. And it's OK....???

Give me a fucking break. Your entire post is disgusting.

Shame on you. READ: http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2004/august/ateqeh_executed_27804.shtml

The execution of Ateqeh Rajabi is the tenth execution of a child offender in Iran recorded by Amnesty International since 1990. Amnesty International has urged Iran’s judicial authorities to halt further executions of child offenders - people who were under 18 years old at the time of the offence. This is to bring Iran’s law and practice in line with requirements of international human rights law.

Amnesty International that expressed “outrage” at the execution of the young girl believes that the execution of Ateqeh Rajabi underlines the urgent necessity that Iran pass legislation removing provision for the execution of child offenders, thereby preventing further execution of child offenders, and bringing Iran into line with its obligations under international law.

In an article published Friday 27 August 2004 in the Germany-based internet newspaper Iran Emrooz, Dr. Hoseyn Baqer Zadeh, an Iranian human rights activist observed that the laws of the Islamic Republic are the “most inhuman, segregationist, insulting and discriminatory” against women....



How can you suggest that this sort of thing is "OK" boggles the mind.

[madeline_con]

30. Wow, did you ever put words in my mouth!

What I wrote is clear if you go back and read it.

Shame on ME?! You're the one who's twisting things around here.

I never once blamed the girl.

[MADem]

31. Execution in Iran is about this child. And all of that supposed prostitution

accusations are the work of the religious priest. The father was high as a kite during those interviews. She did walk alone, because she was unsupervised. And it is likely that the perverted taxi driver PAID the father for the right to rape the daughter.

If you think your post is clear, go back and read it again. You aren't directly blaming the victim, but you are inferring that she had a role in her own death. Shame on her for walking alone, indeed:

I watched a show "Execution in Iran" (or a similar title) about a young girl who was hanged for adultery. Come to find out, one of the main players implicated in the trial supposedly ran a prostitution ring.

What struck me as odd was:

1. The way the girl's father didn't seem outraged that his daughter was supposedly raped repeatedly by a man who would pick her up in his car along the road.

2. That the girl was walking along the road in the first place, in such a suposedly strict culture.

[madeline_con]

32. "Shame on her for walking alone, indeed:"

Is the way YOU interpreted what I wrote.

>>>"And it is likely that the perverted taxi driver PAID the father for the right to rape the daughter."<<<

Is what I meant. The father, from what I saw of him, didn't seem to have any outrage about the repeated rape of his dughter. He never said he wanted the rapist to pay for the crime, etc.

Lack of parenting or deliberation on his part put her on the road alone. SHE was not being blamed.

[MADem]

36. Ok, if that is the case, I am sorry for my misinterpretation.

It just chaps me that people can ignore this shit, and cheer this shameless and horrible regime with "Oh well, it's their laws and their culture." I think that's absolute bullshit--some rights are universal. They'd be all for a necktie party if any governor in the US was pulling this crap. They'd be demonstrating in the streets, violently, if this were the law of the land here. No one deserves to be hanged, but damn, to be hanged for these sorts of "crimes" is just appalling in the 21st Century. I find it outrageous.

The father is a heroin addict. He would have had a pharmacy card under the Shah's regime, which would have given him maintenance doses for free. When Khomeini came in, he killed all the addicts he could catch; and a black market for heroin blossomed where there had never been one before. And since there are poppies all over Iran (to say nothing of "heroin central" next door in Afghanistan--opium and hashish central, too) it ain't hard to get at all, even now, even with the penalties. But you can't always get it "regular" and that addiction is a fierce one. And of course, girls don't count. They're expendable...it sucks.

I think they had the same "pharmacy card" system in Iraq under Saddam, too. Those shi'as don't play, though--they have no compassion for any addiction. It wouldn't surprise me if you see the same increases in burglaries and other crimes that are associated with withdrawal as they discard that system to manage their addicted population. And they'll probably start hanging people for the crime of addiction as well....

[madeline_con]

41. Systems like that protect men from any blame where ....

the abuse of females is concerned. I find it appalling that women are expected to cover themselves head to foot in some cultures, implying that men will "lose control" if they see someone in what we consider normal attire.

It's really disgusting and shows a very immature outlook on male sexuality.


I was just reading recently about the shift away from and back to the hijab in Iran in the last decades.

:rant:

[MADem]

24. Iranians are NOT my enemy. I have many Persian friends. But that government does hang people.

And they are incredibly abusive to women, children and political dissidents. Women get NO justice under the perverse law that they like to say is Sharia but it in fact is fucked up and mysogynistic. Children are disposable. And dissendents are handy if one needs practice in torture techniques.

Incubator babies, my ass. Do a little research, fachrissake. Here, read what Human Rights Watch has to say about the glorious Iranian regime just in the past few months (or are they, in your opinion, tools of GWB, too?)

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/11/11/iran14560.htm
Iran: Halt Execution of Ethnic Arabs After Secret Trial

According to Iranian activists, one of the convicted men, Nazem Bureihi, has been imprisoned since 2000 and was serving a 35-year sentence for “insurgency against the state” at the time of his alleged crime.

“One of the wonders of the Iranian Judiciary is that it can accuse a person of carrying out bombings while he’s in prison,” said Whitson. “That lays bare the arbitrariness of his conviction.”

Iran carries out more executions annually than any other nation but China. Human Rights Watch, which opposes capital punishment in all instances, called on the Iranian government to stop using the death penalty, due to its inherent cruelty and irrevocability.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/12/12/iran14824.htm
Iran: Prosecute Torturers, Not Bloggers

On December 3, branch 1059 of Tehran’s Judiciary commenced a trial against four men, Roozbeh Mirebrahimi, Shahram Rafizadeh, Omid Memarian, and Javad Gholam Tamimi, on charges of “participation in formation of groups to disturb national security,” “propaganda against the state,” “dissemination of disinformation to disturb public opinion by writing articles for newspapers and illegal internet sites,” and “interviews with foreign radio broadcasts.” The court has held one closed-door session, and the trial is scheduled to resume on December 17.

“The Iranian judiciary is trying to prosecute government critics using vague, overbroad laws whose very terms restrict free expression,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, director of the Middle East division at Human Rights Watch. “Iran should be prosecuting the officials accused of torture, not the bloggers accused of holding opinions.”

Human Rights Watch said the laws on which the government has based its case are themselves incompatible with international human rights law. The Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information (1995) provide that “no one may be punished for criticizing or insulting the nation, the state or its symbols, the government, its agencies, or public officials, or a foreign nation, state or its symbols, government agency.” Compiled by experts in international law, national security and human rights, the Principles are based on international law and standards and have come to be widely recognized as an authoritative interpretation of the relationship between legitimate national security interests and the rights of free expression and to information.

The detention of the men by Iranian security forces has been fraught with allegations of serious abuse. In September and October 2004, Tehran’s prosecutor general, Saeed Mortazavi, orchestrated the secret detentions and alleged torture of 21 bloggers and staff of internet news sites known to be critical of the government. Following domestic and international protests, the authorities ordered the release of all the detainees. But the release order came only after Mortazavi had personally coerced the four bloggers now on trial to sign written confessions as a condition for their release, they said. While the Judiciary dropped the charges against the 17 others, it prosecuted those four....

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/09/22/iran14247.htm
Iran: Juvenile Offenders Face the Hangman’s Noose
Despite Two Reprieves, Iran Leads the World in Juvenile Executions

...Two core international human rights treaties, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, prohibit the imposition of the death penalty for crimes committed before the age of 18. Iran has ratified both treaties.

Iran has executed more juvenile offenders in the last five years than any other nation. It is known to have executed 14 juvenile offenders since 2001, including at least one earlier this year and eight in 2005. About 30 juvenile offenders are on death row in the country. ...

Iran: New Death of Political Prisoner in Custody
Independent Investigation of Prison Deaths Essential
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/09/07/iran14136.htm

The Iranian government should urgently appoint an independent commission of Iranian lawyers and doctors to investigate the recent deaths of prisoners under suspicious circumstances, Human Rights Watch said. The commission also needs to examine the conditions of prisoners held for their political beliefs.

“Iranian prison officials have a track record of giving false information about the fate of political prisoners,” said Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch. “After two deaths in just a few weeks, there must be accountability for what is going on inside Iran’s prisons.”

Mohammadi, 38, a student activist, died on July 30. His family, who saw his body at the time of burial, told Human Rights Watch that they saw numerous markings on the body consistent with torture. The authorities forced Mohammadi’s parents to bury him immediately, ignoring their demand for an independent autopsy. Justice Minister Jamal Karimirad said on July 31 that the cause of his death was unknown and that results of an autopsy would be announced in a month. More than a month later, Iranian officials have yet to provide any further information on the cause of death.

On September 6, Iranian Labor News Agency reported Mahdavi’s death, citing claims by government officials that “he committed suicide.” Mahdavi was a 28-year-old sympathizer of the outlawed opposition group Mojahedin Khalq Organization. He had been admitted to Tehran’s Shariati Hospital on Saturday, September 2, following a nine-day hunger strike. ...

Look, just because Bush is an asshole, doesn't mean that Iran has to be a saintly regime. It's not an either-or situation. There actually CAN be more than one asshole on the world stage, and guess what--the regime over there is chockablock FULL of vicious, crazed assholes who prey on women, children, and anyone who disagrees with the government. You would last ten minutes there, with your "questioning" of the status quo. You'd be denied education, your family members would be punished, no one in your extended family could ever hope for a decent job, and you'd be marginalized by society, if they didn't toss you in jail and beat you to death first, and then call your family and tell them you committed suicide.

Again, incubator babies, my ass.

[rebel with a cause]

28. Iran is a bad place.

I get it. But instead of working toward building relationships with them and using diplomacy to try to change the way things are over there, lets just do what he have done in the past. Lets militarily attack them and kill many of the people we say we are there to save. When (and if) we win the war, then we can do some of that nation building we are so good at. Our corporations move in and take control of their resources, our military can build some huge bases where we will keep watch/control over the country, and we will hand pick out a US friendly leader/dictator who will rule his people. Things will go smoothly for a while but then the dictator will get tired of taking orders from the US, and then (and only then) will the US speak out on all the atrocities that said dictator has done over the years that he was our alley.

I don't expect you to relate to anything I just said because you (frankly) just don't want to. The US's buddy the Shah was not a nice guy and was not looking out for his people, he was a dictator just the same as Saddam. The big difference here was the people took out the Shah and we took out Saddam. But both were hand picked by our government to be the ruling dicks.

I hope this young girl does get the justice that was denied her, and I hope that things change in this world where there is justice for all. But then I hope for people to stop doing a lot of things I see being done all around the world. One last word, if any of you are bible totters, just remember that these people are living by the laws given out in the old testament. The same laws that supposedly came from your god.

[MADem]

34. Well, this thread isn't ABOUT military action, it's about human rights issues

It isn't even about the US. The singer trying to help this person escape EXECUTION is an Iranian-CANADIAN. It's about how people are treated by the Iranian government when accused of crimes, against chastity, or what have you. The way the Iranian government treats their accused is the subject, not the cost-benefit analysis of a military attack by the US or anyone else.

For the life of me, I find it exhausting when people have to go far afield and bring the political crap in to DISTRACT from the UNCOMFORTABLE subject--the fact that these bastards who are wicked tools of the Guardian Council continuously violate the human rights of their citizens every single damned day. You want to talk about the military matters, start a thread on it. But don't try to DISMISS the fact that the mullahs are murdering people without due process (and please, skip the "Well, the US is bad, TOOOOOO" argument). And don't use a "Two wrongs make a right" agument to somehow EXCUSE the religious police and the Guardian Council's policies on state-sanctioned murder of females. If you aren't outraged about this, then you must think it's OK for the state to execute women for not being sufficiently chaste. That tells me all I need to know about you.

I'm not a "bible trotter" (where the fuck did you get that horseshit--or is that a "throw everything against the wall because I have no argument" device? And what's with the lame "your god" nonsense? Pull that out of your ass, too?? You didn't take debate at any stage in your educational process, I reckon) but what I am is a person who lived in Iran for many years, have Persian friends, understand the culture, and am absolutely DISGUSTED by what I see happening over there to good people that I happen to care about. And gee, sorry to disappoint you, but I wasn't a particular FAN of the Shah either. Just because I state a few FACTS about the guy doesn't mean I'm on his cheerleading squad. But then, if you read what I wrote without a preconceived prejudice, you would see that, and it would aid your comprehension.

Oh, FWIW, Iran is NOT a bad place. It's a beautiful country, with mountains, plains, deserts and seashores, it is rich in culture and in good times, a wonderful place to live. It has a bad government right now, is all.

[rebel with a cause]

43. I am so sorry that I upset you or in any way

was non sensitive to you. Well, no not really. Because you have not been sensitive to other posters and their input. The only reason military action was brought into it is that someone mentioned the shah. The bible reference was not directed at you, in fact it simply meant if there was anyone throwing a fit over this that was a bible quoter then they should look at what was being taught in the name of a god/religion. It comes from the same book they are quoting.

Honestly I never tought Iran was a bad place, but that is the picture you are painting with such a broad brush. I will be more careful with my words and I hope you will do the same. And no I didn't take any debating classes, but I was taught that in a debate you should not get angry and use insults against your opponent. Also, I have not recently pulled anything out of my ass, as you so nicely put it. I have taken many human rights classes, ones related to culture understanding, and what is and has been done to these cultures by the interference by the elitist governments in US, England, and others. I also recognize that many of those in power now are also elitist that rule with an iron fist (as they use to say) and are not interested in the rights of their people, especially their women and children. I also studied the treatment of women in these countries, and was friends with women who have came from these environments, and so I am not shocked by what you are reporting here. Dismayed that it continues, but not shocked. Iran is not the only country to hold such standards or hang women for such unjust accusations. This government is not the only one who is involved it this type of unjustness. There are many unjust things just as bad as this one happening all around the world. But Iran is the one you are discussint and the one that you say you know and love, so I am sorry that you feel this loss.

Perhaps my conception is off, but it is not preprejudiced as you implied. What I saw on this thread did not lead me to believe you were in a discussion of human rights. I began reading this because of the girl and her unfair treatment, but I was thrown of by the anger that was not for the unjustness of it, but directed at...I don't really know how I can even narrow down what I felt your anger was at. Yes, at the Iranian government but it was more than that. And the perspective at what should be done came across as one of people looking down on others and thinking that as people (and country) we could/should do something to change this and teach these people right from wrong. If I got this impression wrongly, then I appoligize, but I did get this impression from reading this thread. And I suspect others are getting the same impression and not saying anything. Personally, I am not a political person, per se, I am more into human rights and I am just not getting that from this thread. I came here looking for it, but just did not find it. I'm sorry, because I wish I had.

I believe in using diplomacy and education in an attempt to change the world into a better place, and that military intervention should only be used in extreme cases. Even with all we can do that does not mean everyone, or everyplace, is going to be what we want them to be. Just as we are not what some people would like for us to be. We cannot project our ideals and judgements onto other people. That is just the way it is. We have to do the best we can to bring about justice, but we cannot dictate what justice will be met. I will leave you now. Good luck and good bye. Go back to your discussion among yourselves.

[MADem]

46. You never thought Iran was a bad place? Your subject line above sure fooled me.

When you use the word "You" and talk about "your god" in a reply to a post I make, forgive me if I assume you are directing your comments at me. How silly of me to assume that. I really don't know how many times I have to express my admiration for the country where I used to reside and the people of Iran for you to get the drift that I deplore the GOVERNMENT, not the land or people. But that might be a bit too much in the nuance department, I suppose.

My posts were directed entirely at the regime's conduct with regard to these brutal executions. I noted that Iran now is Number Two, right behind China, in killing their own citizenry, and given they are much smaller than China, that should be bothersome to anyone. I don't look down on Persians, I am damned near one, and I am OUTRAGED at how they are being treated by a hideous regime that way too many people seem to want to CHEER just because that asshole President of theirs occasionally takes a swipe at our Monkey.

This thread is NOT about 'military intervention.' What is happening in Iran needs to be addressed by all of the nations of the world, not the US, and not militarily, either. They need to be shamed into stopping this sort of behavior, and chastised on the world stage, and cajoled or shunned if need be. However it is achieved, it needs to be achieved. They need to get the drift that if they kill kids, hold secret trials, torture in their prisons, and impose differing and brutal punishments based on gender, that they are not welcome in the civilized world. Human rights are human rights, they aren't cultural differences...that's just bullshit. And you can't blame western intervention for their completely perverse interpretation of Sharia law.

And yes, that goes for China, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and any of our 'allies' who pull this stupid shit.

I don't think you have to be a female, a gay person, a teenager, or a dissident to have overarching empathy for what these people are going through. You can be an old white guy and 'feel their pain.' Anyone with a basic sense of justice should. This is not a question of cultural differences, this is a question of torture and wrongful execution. The regime should not be cut any slack at all for doing what they are doing, and minimizing their culpability is unhelpful in the extreme.

[Strelnikov_]

47. ..

[ncabot22]

52. Great post, MADem!

I've been following this thread and agree with your sentiments. :yourock:

I have seen a few (not many) posts that seem to excuse the president of Iran solely because he critizes Bush. I was a bit fearful that some were falling into the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" trap.

[MADem]

53. Thank you.

I appreciate the support. I simply abhor false dichotomies, and it drives me batshit when the subject is X, but Y, Z, and Q, R, and S are dragged in when they aren't in the original post and have little or nothing to do with the issue at hand, really.

I just can't understand why it's so difficult to condemn Iran for hanging people, to include young girls and boys, from cranes, without feeling the obigato urge to also complain about our own Monkey's Iran policy. They are two very distinct issues. I have had a problem with the regime ever since they hanged a bunch of people I was acquainted with back in 79, and the Monkey wasn't even in the picture, as he was still boozing and coking back then. Back then, there were a load of "political" hangings, and those eventually died down. What I have noticed is that the number of Sharia hangings (and other brutal judgments) seem to be on the upswing in the last eight to ten years or so. All the hope that reform would take hold after Khomeini croaked seems to be flushed down the toilet...it's getting worse, not better.

[agincourt]

27. A classic case of what you get,

when church and state are in bed together for many generations. Victims are sentenced to hang for having the wrong chromosome. Slavery biggest defender in the American south were the degenerate churches down there.

[mitchtv]

37. please allow me to add the hanging of gays

mostly ignored:
NDON, July 21 – Two gay teenagers were publicly executed in Iran on 19 July 2005 for the ‘crime’ of homosexuality. The youths were hanged in Edalat (Justice) Square in the city of Mashhad, in north east Iran. They were sentenced to death by Court No. 19.

Iran enforces Islamic Sharia law, which dictates the death penalty for gay sex.

One youth was aged 18 and the other was a minor under the age of 18. They were only identified by their initials, M.A. and A.M.

They admitted – probably under torture, London-based gay human rights group Outrage! suggests – to having gay sex but claimed in their defence that most young boys had sex with each other and that they were not aware that homosexuality was punishable by death.

Prior to their execution, the teenagers were held in prison for 14 months and severely beaten with 228 lashes.
this is not the only case

WARNING GRAPHIC PHOTO OF GAY EXECUTION BELOW:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2996339

[MADem]

42. And ya know how the religious police played that disgraceful incident?

They claimed that there was rape involved...can you believe it? They tried to shop that excuse to the international community. It didn't sell, but they sure tried.

"Probably under torture" is more properly "certainly under torture." FWIW, Mashad, where those kids were killed, is The MOST Holy City in Shi'a Islam--the shrine of Imam Reza--following the Shi'a line of succession, he is a direct descendent of Muhamad--is there (they think a Sunni poisoned him--quite the story, there, that contributes to the bad blood between the sects). In Shi'a Islam, a hajj to Mashad is worth many thousands of pilgrimages to Meccah. It's likely that the "holiness" of the city contributed to the enthusiasm for the execution...not that they need much of an excuse to hold one of their crane-necktie parties.

[mitchtv]

44. There has been another hanging since the "double"

ther has been no claim of rape this time , that I know of. It has spread to Shiite iraq, now also.

[MADem]

48. Link you might want to pass on to others

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wHbxfIVshE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKGZaV-M-vs

There's just no justification for this at all...people sometimes need to be confronted with the reality. This shit is just barbaric.

[noonwitch]

56. And they would have stoned her if she hadn't killed the guy

Since they stone rape victims, sort of like the Old Testament instructs the ancient israelites to do.