Iran Leads the World in Executing Children

by Feudal castrato Mon Jun 25, 2007 00:10

is it as many as the number of under 16 year olds blown to bits in iraq by american planes?

262000 women and children killed in iraq according to the lancet report

Iran has its issues and personally I hate fundamentalism of any kind but this article is just propaganda.

And don't you think that american actions in the middle east make it easier to keep repressive regimes such as those in saudi arabia and iran intact, and that these actions encourage radicalism and fundamentalism?

Oh, but I didn't hear you mention saudi arabia. Perhaps we can expect a similar post from you about them soon? (yeah right!)

lets have some numbers please if you want to post stuff like this. That way we can compare the atrocities of both sides of the fundamentalist spectrum in a more meaningful way.

by Chicherin - Bi Bolsheviks Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:43

The UN Human Rights Council yesterday turned a blind eye to abuses in two among the world’s most repressive countries when it decided to end its scrutiny of Iran and Uzbekistan, Human Rights Watch said:

“The Human Rights Council decision sends exactly the wrong signals to abusive governments around the world,” said Peggy Hicks, global advocacy director of Human Rights Watch. “The council’s action amounts to an endorsement of crackdowns on human rights in Iran and Uzbekistan. It shows utter disregard for the human rights activists who are struggling in these countries.”

The number of publicly known executions by Iran grew by more than 80 percent last year to 177, and Iran leads the world in the execution of juveniles. These executions often follow secret trials that fail to meet minimum international standards. For example, in July 2006, an Iranian court sentenced 10 men to death following a one-day trial, all of whom have since been executed.

by Shep Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:36

I cant help but feel that organisations opposed to Irans suspect HR record have been thoroughly infiltrated by Neo-con chicken hawks adn would gladly swap the lives of those who are currently oppressed fot the hundreds of thousands who would be massacred of the US invaded.

Hands off Iran?

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:37

Why do you wish to ignore the abuses carried out by the Iranian Govt? Like you i oppose the occupation of Iraq and I dont think any US actions are altruistic. But I'm not going to keep quiet about the savagery of the Iranian Govt. They are a pack of barbarians.

I'm not making this up, there are Human Rights Watch reports. There are plenty of Am,nesty reports as well. Why would anyone wish to remain silent about the actions of the Iranian Junta?

by Jim O'Sullivan Mon Jun 25, 2007 11:55

Chicherin,

"Why do you wish to ignore the abuses carried out by the Iranian Govt?"

Never said that. All injustices need to be highlighted not just what is happening in Iran. Then conern I have is that Neo-con states are capable to creating a justification to invade Iran. China executes citizens with depressing regularity yet this fact is rarely aired. I have no problem accepting that your concerns are genuine however you need to be careful that George doesn't start quoting you as he excuses an invasion.

by pinkie Mon Jun 25, 2007 13:03

Chicherin, thanks for highlighting this important human rights issue. I must say that I’m stunned at the childishness and political naivety of some of the responses to your article. In particular, the idea that GWB might read your article and in it find justification for an Iran invasion made me laugh. Should he ever choose to invade Iran, he will already have enough lame excuses: the old “harbouring of terrorists” argument, the “nuclear programme” argument, etc.

Fear of deliberate misinterpretation of issues by others should not deter us from publicising serious human rights abuses, regardless of who the perpetrators are. Cheers.

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 13:51

What are you talking about? 'Political naivety?'

Yeah allowing Bush to parrot left-wing organisations and allow their stance to strengthen his is own is politically naive alright.

That you here attacking people who basically agree with you shows political naivety of the highest order.
Jim’s concerns about having your message hi-jacked are thoroughly valid. Rasping off high ground platitudes is as much missing the point as it is ego massaging.

Hands off Iran must drown out the US war drums while condemning the Mullahs. This must be done on an equal pegging to avoid US soldiers marching into Iran with your banners wrapped around their tanks.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 13:58

You dont seem to care about how Iranian citizens are treated by their "government". You and your ilk are apologists for an Islamo-Fascist dictatorship which has outlawed strikes and imprisons trade unionists. Women and gays are stoned to death or hanged. But once again you attack the messenger.

I oppose Bush but I wont support the medieval savagery of the Iranian "Government". I cannot understand how any socialist could be a cheerleader for those Mullahs who slaughter Iranian socialists, trade unionists, feminists and ordinary menmwomen and children.

I say no to Imperialism and no to Islamo-Fascism.

by Jim O'Sullivan Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:00

The point is pinkie, which you obviously missed while you were simultanieously stunned and laughing, to be selective in condamnation of injustice is counter-productive. In this case, the execution of anybody young or old ought to be outlawed. Other countries have records that are every bit as bad as Irans. To pretend otherwise is to be a propogandist. The USA, the so called leader of the free world, is still executing citizens and as anyone who bothers to look will tell you, the vast majority of those killed belong to minority groups.
Do you want to start on the numbers of children that have been and continue to be slaughtered by weapons delivered by the US , Israel, Britian etc etc. Are these killings of children somehow excusable?
End all injustice no matter where it occurs.

by Eamon Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:12

A few weeks ago, this act of terrorism was perpetrated by the Israeli
State:

http://umkahlil.blogspot.com/2007/06/israels-soldiers-k....html

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:25

"I oppose Bush but I wont support the medieval savagery of the Iranian "Government". I cannot understand how any socialist could be a cheerleader for those Mullahs who slaughter Iranian socialists, trade unionists, feminists and ordinary menmwomen and children."

Who the hell is cheerleading for the Mullahs? Really, catch a hold of yourself.

Point to any evidence that this has been going on. The Mullahs are to be condemned, but don’t give me your absolutism and your way or the highway methods. I oppose both Bush and the Mullahs. In doing so I will try to be careful I don’t inadvertently support either.

It is this concern that has been voiced here. Nothing more, and certainly nothing like the support for the Mullahs that you amazingly have read from what has been posted

by JimO'Sullivan Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:25

The golden rule for all who wish to engage in propoganda is to know when to shut up. Compare the original post from Chicherin, which sought to highlight the execution of "children", with the following latest effort which is a response to a few polite queries.

"You dont seem to care about how Iranian citizens are treated by their "government". You and your ilk are apologists for an Islamo-Fascist dictatorship which has outlawed strikes and imprisons trade unionists. Women and gays are stoned to death or hanged. But once again you attack the messenger.

I oppose Bush but I wont support the medieval savagery of the Iranian "Government". I cannot understand how any socialist could be a cheerleader for those Mullahs who slaughter Iranian socialists, trade unionists, feminists and ordinary menmwomen and children.

I say no to Imperialism and no to Islamo-Fascism."

This comes across to me as an anti Iran rant. It is a classic case of selective assessment and judgement.
By the way, when was the last time you were in Iran Chicherin?

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:25

The Government of Iran has a history of stating that it does not execute child offenders, but the facts tell a different story. In 2005 alone, despite being urged in January by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to suspend the practice immediately, at least eight child offenders were executed, including two who were still under 18 at the time of their execution. Currently, there are at least 40 others awaiting execution.

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:40

Jaysus Chicherin, your hostility to any one who even marginally differs from your point of view is shocking.

Now your acusing people of being apologists for the Mullahs. I have no idea how you managed to string that conclusion together but it’s not doing you any favours in trying to highlight the injustices perpetrated in Iran. You are not the standard to which we must rally. I condemn all injustice, equally.

You however have a very narrow view about how to show that support and have started abusing people because they are cautious that they done lend credibility to Bushes agenda. Can you not see the prudence of such a position?

Why all the vitriol and ranting and name-calling? Why are you alienating people from your position. A lot of misplaced anger or there is personal agenda at work here. None of this adds up? What’s your problem?

by pinkie Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:49

To “Jim O’Sullivan”,

We all know about state executions in the USA, which very few people reading these pages would condone. Your point just serves to highlight the silliness of your earlier suggestion that the US president, who we know is himself is an execution enthusiast, would use the state executions in Iran as an excuse to invade that country! Please remember that the invasion of Iraq didn’t stop state executions there.

Little is known about child executions in Iran, and the above article serves to highlight this abuse of human rights. Whether the publisher has been to Iran or not does not affect the credibility of the story. If you’ve been to Iran yourself, then please provide us with your insight on human rights as practiced there! If you have information that executions of children are more prevalent in China and elsewhere than in Iran, as you seem to indicate, then please publish your data. If you wish to discuss the completely unrelated issue of exports of US weaponry, you would be best advised to keep your comments for other pages on this site that are more relevant to that topic.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 14:54

"This comes across to me as an anti Iran rant. It is a classic case of selective assessment and judgement."

I think you will find that its a position held by Iranian socialists who oppose the Islamist Regime. I suppose they are anti Iran as well.

"By the way, when was the last time you were in Iran Chicherin?"

Never. But I last spoke face to face with an Iranian socialist just a few weeks ago. What contact do you have with the Iranian Opposition?

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:00

If I am alienating people like you then its little loss.

Lets look at what you wrote:

"Yeah allowing Bush to parrot left-wing organisations and allow their stance to strengthen his is own is politically naive alright."

So left wing organisations should remain quite about the abuses carried out by the Iranian Regime! I think not. Socialists, trade-uinionists and feminists are being imprisoned and murdered by the Iranian Regime. I wont stay silent about that.

" Rasping off high ground platitudes is as much missing the point as it is ego massaging."

Go tell the Iranian Oppositio that they are just ego-massaging.

"Hands off Iran must drown out the US war drums while condemning the Mullahs. This must be done on an equal pegging to avoid US soldiers marching into Iran with your banners wrapped around their tanks. "

Your real colours emerge here. I oppose any imperialist invasion of Iran but I'll take advice from the Iranian Socialist Opposition. Not from you.

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:05

Another way off the point post from someone else with an agenda. All this 'I'm more against injustice than you' crap is intolerable.

You’re like a bull in a china shop throwing crass accusations around.

"If you have information that executions of children are more prevalent in China and elsewhere than in Iran, as you seem to indicate, then please publish your data"

What the hell is that unadulterated bullshit? Nobody indicated any such thing.

The fact you are attacking Jim O'Sullivan seems to me that you have a problem with him more than his point of view or the issues he raised. You’re ridiculous assumptions on his behalf belie you're attempt to rationally debate the issue (Nobody really disagreed with you) and expose your intent to simply attack anyone who differs even slightly with your view.

Jim, fair play to you. I agrre with your sentiments and you will be glad to know that real activists share your concerns over showing support to the Iranians without strengthening Bushes case for Invasion.

This muppet is only representative of himself.

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:11

Hey chichrin/pinkie whatever your name is. Dont assume to speak for the Iranian resistance.

Iranians are dying right now. You brow beating people on a website isn't changing that.

Genuine supporters would debate this rationally, not adopt an intractable all knowing position of superiority. I'll take Tonys advice. You aint worth talking to.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:17

If you wish to do something practical then you could write to the Iranian Ambassador to Ireland, requesting that he use his influence to prevent further executions of children.

Here are the contact details for the Iranian Embassy. It is followed by a sample text.

Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran
72 Mount Merrion Avenue
Blackrock
Co. Dublin
Tel: 01 288 0252 /01 288 5881
Fax: 01 283 4246
Email: [email protected]

Your Excellency,

I am writing to you to express my concern about the continuing execution of child offenders in Iran.

I urge your government, as a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to:

- ensure that the Iranian government implements its commitment under the ICCPR, which states that "sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age";
- abolish the death penalty as a sentence imposed on persons for having committed crimes before the age of 18, as required by article 37 (a) of the Convention on the Right of the Child (CRC) which states that "No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age".
- immediately commute the death sentences imposed on all those who were sentenced to death for acts that may have been committed below the age of 18, including Sina (m, aged 17) Mostafa (m, aged 16), Ali (m, aged 16), Rasoul Mohammadi (m, aged 17), Abbas Hosseini (m, aged 19), and at least 30 others;

Yours sincerely,

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:25

"Dont assume to speak for the Iranian resistance."

I dont. I merely reflect their opinions. They want to see the mullahs overthrown. They want a society where women arent stoned to death, where gays arent hanged, where trade unions are legal.

"Iranians are dying right now. You brow beating people on a website isn't changing that."

The Iranian Opposition want the facts known and publicised. Why would any progressive person wish to conceal the fact that the Iranian Regime executes children?

You effectively accused the Iranian Opposition and their supporters of being on the side of the US. Well I dont take that sort of abuse lying down. Consider my response browbeating if you so wish.

by davekey Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:34

Why don't compose another letter to the U.S. embassy asking them to try and stop the neo-cons from nuking Iran.

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:48

Jesus christ. Are you capable of rationally interperating facts as they are presented?

Your anger and rage has blinded you and you are making assumptions from what you think people are saying. Which is odd because the language used was consice with very little room for ambiguity.

Nobody but nobody on this thread wants a society where women are stoned to death, where gays are hanged, where trade unions are illegal. You are simply spouting rhetoric. These are goals of many organisations. Not just IR.

"The Iranian Opposition want the facts known and publicised."

Nobody wants to muzzle them. Where did you get that idea from? Really, you should calm down and actually read what people are writing. You’re coming across like a shrill crank.

The facts are published, they are becoming increasingly well known.
But you seem to think that anyone who raises the obvious point of not adding to Bushes reasons to invade by making sure condemnations of the Mullahs go hand in hand with outright opposition to any idea of US aggression toward Iran is in fact an agent of the US regime and protagonist for invasion.

Absolutist propaganda and spin that Goebbels would have been proud of.

“You effectively accused the Iranian Opposition and their supporters of being on the side of the US. Well I dont take that sort of abuse lying down”

An astonishing conclusion.

Nobody made such an accusation. You cannot be serious.
There is no point in engaging with this kind of off the wall childishness. You’re irrationally making ridiculous accusations that are paper thin and would not bear up to the slightest scrutiny.

I have much better things to be doing with my day.

It doesn’t matter how many times I say I’m against US aggression you dishonestly try to lay the charge at my feet. Supine nonsense.

.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 15:55

"But you seem to think that anyone who raises the obvious point of not adding to Bushes reasons to invade by making sure condemnations of the Mullahs go hand in hand with outright opposition to any idea of US aggression toward Iran is in fact an agent of the US regime and protagonist for invasion."

Look I made it clear that I was opposed to any US invasion. You tried to smear me and the Iranian opposition. You seem to be tieing yourself in knots here.

"Absolutist propaganda and spin that Goebbels would have been proud of."

What? I'm not the one who wants to soft soap an Islamo-Fascist regime.

"“You effectively accused the Iranian Opposition and their supporters of being on the side of the US. Well I dont take that sort of abuse lying down”
An astonishing conclusion.
Nobody made such an accusation. "

All anyone has to do is scroll back up and read your comments. You suggested that the US tanks would be wrapped in the critical articles of those who oppose the Iranian REgime.

"It doesn’t matter how many times I say I’m against US aggression you dishonestly try to lay the charge at my feet. Supine nonsense."

Eh? Are you getting lost? I knowc you oppose US aggression, as do I. What I doubt is whether you actuaslly oppose Iranian agression towards opposition socialists, trade-unionists and feminists.

by davekey Mon Jun 25, 2007 16:43

What you don't seem to understand is there's a time and place for this. Now is not the time because there is so much antagonism already towards Iran. This is the time for taking the heat off and trying to calm things down.

These stories are used by the neo-cons mouthpieces i.e. the mainstream media in the U.S. to try and manipulate public opinion for a war. If this happens then your cause will become futile. There will be mass killing of children and human rights abuses with no law or order.

Nobody is against your cause but their is much more at stake right now.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 17:16

"This is the time for taking the heat off and trying to calm things down."

That is not what the Socialist opposition in Iran believe.

"These stories are used by the neo-cons mouthpieces i.e. the mainstream media in the U.S. to try and manipulate public opinion for a war. "

The truth is the the truth. Do you really believe that AI & HRW should remain silent? You play into the Neo Cons hands by downplaying these stories. This gives the neocons an opportunity to say that the left are uncritical supporters of the Iranian Regime.

"If this happens then your cause will become futile. There will be mass killing of children and human rights abuses with no law or order."

Its possible to oppose imperialism and to also oppose the Islamist government in Iran. It is those who uncritically support the Iranian Government who will be responsible.

I stand on the side of the oppressed Iranian trade-unionists, sociaists and feminists. To remain silent about their oppression would be a crime.

by Jim O'Sullivan Mon Jun 25, 2007 17:22

pinkie are you reading this thread upside down or are you just recovering from a bad night.

"We all know about state executions in the USA,"
Why then does the poster not condemn that with the same vehemence that he accuse Iran with?

"Please remember that the invasion of Iraq didn’t stop state executions there."
In fact, the invasion of Iraq has been a disaster for the people of Iraq. All the more reason that we must ensure that we do not become inadvertent cheerleaders for a repeat performance in Iran.

"Little is known about child executions in Iran'
Then what precisely are we talking about. Heresay?

"and the above article serves to highlight this abuse of human rights"

From "very little is known about child executions" to "highlighting this abuse" Imagine having pinkie and friend on a jury! You better not have dark skin methinks.

"Whether the publisher has been to Iran or not does not affect the credibility of the story"
This is crazy stuff. From where does this story get it's credibility? The accusations that are being made, that Iran routely executes children, is very serious. Therefore before any such accusation can be made, credible evidence must be available. We all know that at the present time there is a heavy propoganda war being waged and calling Iran a nation of child killers is as emotive as it gets and is a classic piece of propoganda spin. Given the proponderence of brutality in the world today the question must be why did the poster come on and single out Iran? That is what is worrying about this post.
Condemn all injustice, all state executions, all slaughter of innocent people by warmongers etc. Being selective undermines the credibility of the poster.

by Aragon Mon Jun 25, 2007 17:25

The left should not be quiet about oppression in Iran while arguing fiercely against US imperialist aggression. We should argue fiercely against both. Besdies it's not as if the US has clean hands where oppression is concerned either. The US have executed and continue to execute people with mental illness for example.

The job for the left is to make both of them ashamed of their conduct.

by someone else Mon Jun 25, 2007 17:31

Amnesty International's annual report on the use of the Death Penalty published 2006, served a reminder that China, Iran and the USA continue to execute the most of their prisoners.
In 2005 over 2,148 people were executed in 22 countries, of whom 1770 were in China, 94 in Iran and 60 in the USA. 94% of those killed were in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USA. An additional 5,186 people were sentenced to death

in 2006, 8 children were executed in Iran, they join the statistics of underage offenders executed since 2000, the complete figure was 26 for Amnesty international's 2006 report based on 2005 stats on the death penalty worldwide, the majority of whom were executed in the USA.
that report :-
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-stats2005-eng

n 2006 at least 1,544 people were executed in 25 countries worldwide. At least 3,861 people were sentenced to death in 55 countries. The true numbers are believed to be considerably higher. By far the majority of executions – 90 per cent – were carried out in just five countries: China, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and the USA. It ought be obvious that less people were executed in 2006 than in 2005 and less people were sentanced to death. That's obvious isn't it?

Countries that executed people convicted of crimes committed while they were under 18 were Iran and Pakistan.

this year's less detailed updates -
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng
http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/A-year-in-campaigning/...nalty

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 17:38

"Given the proponderence of brutality in the world today the question must be why did the poster come on and single out Iran? That is what is worrying about this post.
Condemn all injustice, all state executions, all slaughter of innocent people by warmongers etc. Being selective undermines the credibility of the poster"

Jim, please think about what you are saying. I cannot condemn every injustice in the world each time I open my mouth or each time I go online. If I tried it in one article then it would be a carcrash.

I wrote an article specifically about Iran and how it executes children. I pointed out that the US also executes those who were under 18 when they committed their crimes.

You have written articles where you have concentrated on single issues. Does that undermine your credibility on others?

by Val Mon Jun 25, 2007 18:36

Look Chichrin, its impossible to have an open honest debate with you.

Lets examine your last riposte and determine whether you are actually addressing the points raised or just rehashing the same diatribe like a broken record.

V_"Absolutist propaganda and spin that Goebbels would have been proud of."

C_What? I'm not the one who wants to soft soap an Islamo-Fascist regime.

Who exactly is soft soaping the Iranian regime? Why are you making things up

V_"But you seem to think that anyone who raises the obvious point of not adding to Bushes reasons to invade by making sure condemnations of the Mullahs go hand in hand with outright opposition to any idea of US aggression toward Iran is in fact an agent of the US regime and protagonist for invasion."

C_"Look I made it clear that I was opposed to any US invasion. You tried to smear me and the Iranian opposition. You seem to be tying yourself in knots here."

Just how on earth did you come to the conclusion that I was smearing you and the Iranian opposition. Are in full control of your faculties. Can you comprehend anything or are you a paranoid crank?

Opposition to US aggression and citing the need to be cautious in making sure they do not use our opposition to the Iranian oppression is now tantamount to smear. You are off the wall I'm afraid. Absolute nonsense.

As for tying myself in knots, I think that is the wishful thinking of a spoil reactionary brat.
You invited anyone to scroll back up through the thread. I presume you mean for them to draw their own conclusions. The only conclusion that can be reached is that you cannot read my angry little friend. Which leads to this.

C_"You effectively accused the Iranian Opposition and their supporters of being on the side of the US. Well I dont take that sort of abuse lying down”

V_An astonishing conclusion.
Nobody made such an accusation. "

C_All anyone has to do is scroll back up and read your comments. You suggested that the US tanks would be wrapped in the critical articles of those who oppose the Iranian REgime.

This is what I wrote-"Hands off Iran must drown out the US war drums while condemning the Mullahs. This must be done on an equal pegging to avoid US soldiers marching into Iran with your banners wrapped around their tanks."

Nobody with a modicum of reason will extrapolate what I said as an attack on Iranian resistance. No matter how hard you would wish it to be the case is irrelevant. You have clearly shown yourself to be dishonest and have continuously misrepresented the facts and placed words in the mouth of those who opinion differed from yours.

And finally,

V_"It doesn’t matter how many times I say I’m against US aggression you dishonestly try to lay the charge at my feet. Supine nonsense."

C_Eh? Are you getting lost? I knowc you oppose US aggression, as do I. What I doubt is whether you actuaslly oppose Iranian agression towards opposition socialists, trade-unionists and feminists.

What, can you fucking read minds now? Where have I said I support Iranian aggression towards opposition socialists, trade-unionists and feminists? Spin and more spin.

But to continue, you see you accused me of saying you where pro US aggression, its here in Black and white when you wrote "You effectively accused the Iranian Opposition and their supporters of being on the side of the US" A sweeping statement based on absolutely nothing bar your poor comprehension skills.
You are spin merchant and do a disservice to IR. You are full of bluster and lack the substance it requires to debate this issue seriously and I doubt very much any Iranian socialist would allow you next or near their struggle if regurgitated rhetoric is all you can muster.

IR want their struggle highlighted. They do not what to whip up a frenzy which can be high-jacked by the Neo-con Right to further their agenda of invading Iran. They are not stupid. It would be self-defeating to have the mullahs over-thrown by the US military. The ensuing chaos would be unimaginable and any notion of socialist ideals being realised will be completely destroyed .You should know this. So why do you attack everyone who broaches this very reasonable point as the work of an agent provocateur?

This is why I continue to say opposition to the mullahs must be balanced with equal condemnation of US aggression. A commitment to Regime change from within Iran itself by the Iranian people without any external interference. Clear unambiguous condemnation of any media attempts to spin IR as further reason to invade. Show a united front on all struggles worldwide, portray solidarity and lesson the chances of any one struggle being seized by the neo-cons and ultimately used against itself.

You can come back with any amount of manufactured shite C but to be honest I am not interested in anything you have to say anymore.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 18:44

You have written a lot and distorted a lot but its quite obvious that you havent got a clue what the Iranian socialist Opposition want.

Which Iranian Socialist organisations are you in contact with?

You wish to smear anyone who tells the truth about Iran. I have a good idea as to which party or alliance you belong to.

by davekey Mon Jun 25, 2007 18:51

“That is not what the Socialist opposition in Iran believe.”

Well I don’t know what their agenda is but if they are playing into the neo-cons hands by highlighting these stories now it would make me very wary of them.

“The truth is the the truth. Do you really believe that AI & HRW should remain silent? “

I believe all people should be using this time to try and clam down the rhetoric against Iran, there’s open discussion about nuking it and given the current state of the world nothing would surprise me.

“You play into the Neo Cons hands by downplaying these stories. This gives the neocons an opportunity to say that the left are uncritical supporters of the Iranian Regime.”

The left in the U.S. barely has a voice, these stories are used by Fox, CNN etc. to step up the rhetoric, criticizing the left is a much weaker argument for them than highlighting these stories.

“Its possible to oppose imperialism and to also oppose the Islamist government in Iran. It is those who uncritically support the Iranian Government who will be responsible.”

I don’t understand why you are using this time to make your criticisms. I would also seriously question any information now that’s coming out of Iran, we know that there are special-ops currently going on in the country, so all information has to be treated with suspicion.

by Chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 19:01

Think about what you are saying. You are susoicious of the Iranian Left. Why? Because they want to publicise the fact that trade unions are banned, women and gays are executed for expressing their sexuality.

Effectively you are damning the opposition.

Do you think that Amnesty are also part of the plot?

The crimes of the Iranian Regime should be shouted from the rooftops. Those who who try to keep them quiet are complicit in those crimes.

by chicherin Mon Jun 25, 2007 19:13

Heres the opening para of Manifesto of the Third Camp against
US Militarism and Islamic Terrorism. The full manifesto is at the url below. Irish signatories of the Manifesto include: Anthony McIntyre, editor of The Blanket; Kevin McQuillan, former chairperson of the IRSP, Richard O'Rawe, author of Blanketmen,

The present conflict between the Western governments and the Islamic Republic of Iran can have disastrous human, political and social consequences. The terrible experience of Iraq has shown to all the catastrophes that can result from economic sanctions and a military attack. Deterioration of living conditions, economic plight, death, destruction and displacement of people, and increased repression by the Islamic regime, would be some of the immediate consequences of economic sanctions or a military attack on Iran. This policy would unleash Islamic terrorism on a regional scale and escalate it internationally.

We must stand up with all our power to the US government’s and its allies’ bullying. We must put an end to the crimes of the opposite pole, i.e. Islamic terrorism. We must help the people of Islam-stricken countries to get rid of the menace of Islamic terrorist states and forces. American militarism and Islamic terrorism have brutalised the world. Neither of them has a solution to the present crisis and its resulting problems. Rather, they are themselves the cause of this crisis and its aggravation. Civilised humanity must rise up against both these poles and the suffering that they have imposed on the world.

by davekey Mon Jun 25, 2007 19:23

“Think about what you are saying. You are susoicious of the Iranian Left. Why? Because they want to publicise the fact that trade unions are banned, women and gays are executed for expressing their sexuality.”

Absolutely, when Bush has his finger on the button.

“Do you think that Amnesty are also part of the plot?”

Is this your source?

“The crimes of the Iranian Regime should be shouted from the rooftops. Those who who try to keep them quiet are complicit in those crimes.”

To be highlighting Iran is very irresponsible at this time and is complicit with the neo-con agenda. Hundreds of thousands of children in Iraq have been murdered already, we know the neo-cons want complete control of the Middle East and Africa including, Iran and Syria, it’s been well documented. We also know the absolute chaos that ensues after occupation and we know the CIA’s history of supporting dictators and orchestrating terror, including in Iran. This is what needs to be shouted from the rooftops.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:09

There is no point in continuing this. We are repeating ourselves at this stage.

I think that Amenesty, HRW are reputable organisations. I know of no one (other than yourself ) who suggests that they are distributing false anti Iranian propaganda. If its a case of accepting their analysis or that of the Iranian Regime then I accept their analysis.

Iranian Opposition Socialists such as: Worker-communist Party, Workers Left Unity Party, CPML, Toufan, MSORWI. I prefer their analysis to that of the Iranian Regime.

Supporters of Hands Off the People of Iran include:

John Pilger, Noam Chomsky , Senator David Norris, Tony Gregory TD , Patrick Nulty - Chair, Labour Youth , Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD , Daithí McKay MLA, John Dallat MLA, Nura Abdullatti Hagi - Somali Human Rights Advocacy Group, Des Derwin, Vice-President, Dublin Council of Trade Unions , Cllr Fozol Miah - Respect, Tower Hamlets, Cllr Oliur Rahman - Respect, Tower Hamlets, Cllr Rania Khan - Respect, Tower Hamlets,.

Perhaps they have all been duped as well.

by paddytheplank Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:46

Listen Chicherin. When Iran is a radioactive waste land and the casualties are in biblical proportions, and Bush parrots all you have been saying as part of the reason they have invaded and needed to use Nuclear weapons to spread freedom.

Do you think those who died will thank you because you hadn’t the gray matter to think for yourself but blindly spout rhetoric? Can you think outside the box? Can to admit these are genuine concerns and not the musings of US intelligence officers intent on spreading disinformation? Are you capable of conceeding that these are genuine concerns?

by paddytheplank Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:53

John Pilger, Noam Chomsky , Senator David Norris, Tony Gregory TD , Patrick Nulty - Chair, Labour Youth , Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD , Daithí McKay MLA, John Dallat MLA, Nura Abdullatti Hagi - Somali Human Rights Advocacy Group, Des Derwin, Vice-President, Dublin Council of Trade Unions , Cllr Fozol Miah - Respect, Tower Hamlets, Cllr Oliur Rahman - Respect, Tower Hamlets, Cllr Rania Khan - Respect, Tower Hamlets,.

These people are signatories to various documents to show solidarity with HOI. Do not attempt to speak for them. You cannot claim to know how they feel on the issue of having Anti-mullah sentiments being used as a prelude to war with Iran by the Bush regime.

You want to lend weight to your voice, use cogent argument, do not hide behind politicans and intellectual giants.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:26

Its obvious to you that anyone who exposes the savagery of the Iranian Regime is a supporter of the US.

The above signatories support HOPI. They do not support the SWP or any of those who believe it is a crime to criticise the savagery of the Iranian Regime. Why dont you produce a list of those who believe it is wrong to criticise Iran or to publicise reports of the uncivilised behaviour of the Mullahs?

Are you seriously suggesting that John Pilger and Noam Chomsky would want to supress information about the execution of children?

by Saoirse Tue Jun 26, 2007 14:15

Chicherin is right that Iran executes the greatest number of 16/17 year olds but, as the Amnesty statistics show, it is Pakistan that executes the youngest children - as young as 13 years old. This is an important point. Because Pakistan is an enthusiastic supporter of the "War on Terror", it gets away with stuff that Iran would be bombed into the stone age for, e.g. last week's statement by one of its government ministers that making Salman Rushdie a Knight will lead to suicide bombers in England. Can you imagine what the response would have been had an Iranian government minister said that?

The point of this post is to say: while he is right about Iran. Chicherin needs to look at the wider picture - for example, as others have pointed out, the Amnesty stats show the US not far behind Iran on executing children. But it does seem these days that only Iran gets attacked for these abuses. Before someone comes back and says I am making up these stats, here is the Amnesty link:
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-children-stat...s-eng

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 14:30

A good and fair post. Everything you say about Pakistan is correct and should be publicised and I really wish Rushdie hadnt taken that knighthood.

At the start of this thread I pointed out that the US also execute those who were under 18 when they committed their crimes. But the US doesnt actually execute anyone under 18.

The difference of course is that you dont have socialists cheering on the US or Pakistan, saying what great places they are. Unfortunately you have socialists cheering on Iran and sharing platforms with those who repress trade-unionists, feminists and democrats.

by paddytheplank Tue Jun 26, 2007 14:30

He cannot look at the wider picture. He is wholly fixated with his position on Iran and attacks vehemently anyone who offers a different perspective.

The annoying thing is that I also oppose The Iranian governments maltreatment of its citizens, i just think it needs to be put into context with and rationalised along the lines of vocal support but congruent on a policy of equally and simultaneously condemning US aggression.

We need to be careful we do not bolster Bushes arguement for Regime change by giving him further ammunition by singling out Iran for Human rights abuses. It is good activism to condemn all human rights abuses, to counter Iran’s crimes by balancing them against US crimes and Pakistani crimes and Chinese crimes. This prevents the Chicken Hawks in Washington from citing Iran as a sole example and a prime candidate for regime change in the pursuit of 'Freedoms'

To Chichrin this constitutes support for the Iranian regime.
Intractable blinkered thinking.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 14:37

This article is about Iran. Its not about every country in the world, nor is it about every injustice in the world.

Seeing as the article is about Iran I am concentrating on how children are treated there.

No one is preventing you from writing articles on the treatment of children in the US or Sudan. No one is preventing you from writing articles attacking US aggression towards Iran. Write those types of articles and I will post comments in support of you.

But you seem intent on derailing a storyline that is about the execution of children in Iran.

If you really think you are right then please make the Indymedia readership aware of those organisations and individuals who believe that this report should be supressed.

by paddytheplank Tue Jun 26, 2007 14:47

Ya see Soairse. Nowhere have I suggested that this report be suppressed.

How can you deal with somebody who trys to shut you up by puttiing words in your mouth or accuses accuses you of falsehoods.

All that what said is that care be taken so that Bush is not given further cause to justify attacking Iran.

I'm sure every human rights group on the planet would agree with that.

That Chichrin appeal to the indymedia set to back him up proves he is about point scoring and one-upmanship. he doesnt giev a shit about the message, just as long as it is him and him alone who is saying it.

He has used lies to back him up, claimimg that those whoe dissagree with him on certain points support the Iranian regime, support the US, are anti trade Union and anti feminist.

Its 'with or against us' gibberish.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:05

By rubbishing this report, by insisting that I deal with every injustice in the world you are effectively suppressing the report. You are wamping it with sopam.

Why dont you write articles about the issues which concern you? I cannot deal with all of your concerns in one article.

All I am asking is that you post relevant comments here.

by davekey Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:10

Chiherin is like a passenger on the sinking Titanic complaining that the soup is to cold

by paddytheplank Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:13

Nobody is rubbishing the report mate. Deal with the facts, not your imagined understanding of them.

While attacking Iran’s human rights record it is relevant to point out that Iran is not alone in such human rights abuses and it most certainly is not the worst offender on Earth.
The reason this needs to be contextualised specifically in Iran’s case is that the US have a huge military force next door, have openly declared its intention to invade, has not ruled out the use of tactical nuclear weapons and is continually building its case to that end .

If the US invades none of what you support will happen. The human rights abuses will be catastrophically worse.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:18

What you are saying does not appear to coincide with what the Iranian opposition wants. I could of course be wrong. Why not produce a list of organisations and individuals who dont want wish to see human rights abuses in Iran highlighted.

Now is that too much to ask for?

You might include some Iranian socialist groups which want these topics hushed up. I'm not aware of any.

by davekey Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:30

-"Why not produce a list of organisations and individuals who dont want wish to see human rights abuses in Iran highlighted."

No organization is going to come out and say such a thing and you know it.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:41

Then why are you and paddy suggesting that it is wrong to publicise such reports? Why are you spamming this storyline?

I firmly believe that Noam Chomsky, John Pilger and the (non SWP) RESPECT Councillors want these reports and other criticisms of Iran to be widely circulated. They would prefer that it is done by progressive organisations such as AI & HRW. This does not in any way contradict Pilger & Chomskys opposition to any aggression towards Iran.

by davekey Tue Jun 26, 2007 15:58

There's no point continuing with this, we both have completely different points of view.

by Chicherin Tue Jun 26, 2007 16:08

This is an extract from the Hands Off The People Of Iran Manifesto which was signed by Noam Chomsky and John Pilger. Full text at the link.

We recognise that there is an urgent need to establish a principled solidarity campaign with the people of Iran. The contradictions between the interests of the neo-conservatives in power in the USA and the defenders of the rule of capital in the Islamic Republic has entered a dangerous new phase.

US imperialism and its allies are intent on regime change from above and are seriously considering options to impose this - sanctions, diplomatic pressure, limited strikes or perhaps bombing the country back to the stone age.

In Iran, the theocracy is using the international outcry against its nuclear weapons programme to divert attention away from the country's endemic crisis, deflect popular anger onto foreign enemies and thus prolong its reactionary rule.

...This means that any support from the anti-war movement for the reactionaries who currently govern Iran and repress its people is in effect indirect support for the occupation government in Iraq.

...We call on all anti-capitalist forces, progressive political groups and social organisations to join activists of the Iranian left to both oppose imperialism's plans and to organise practical solidarity with the growing movement against war and repression in Iran headed by the working class, women, students and youth.

Our campaign demands are:
No to imperialist war!
No to the theocratic regime!
The immediate and unconditional withdrawal of US/UK troops from the Gulf region!
Opposition to Israeli expansionism and aggression!
Support to all working class and progressive struggles in Iran against poverty and repression!
Support for socialism, democracy and workers' control in Iran!
For a nuclear-free Middle East in a nuclear-free world!

by davekey Tue Jun 26, 2007 16:36

- “...This means that any support from the anti-war movement for the reactionaries who currently govern Iran and repress its people is in effect indirect support for the occupation government in Iraq.”

This statement doesn’t make any sense to me, Iraq has a U.S. puppet government orchestrating death squads and terror and is complicit in stealing the countries oil. Iran is a relatively stable and peaceful country which uses it’s oil revenues to build infrastructure and for social programmes.

The truth is that no independent Middle Eastern country can afford to have a democracy now. They would just be wide open for a CIA operation to install a puppet dictator (under the guise of democracy), complete terror and chaos would ensue and the resources stolen. Just like they did in Iran in 1953. I’m not saying the current regimes are good but anything that follows them now in the current world situation (a rogue U.S. superpower), would be a hundred times worse.

by Chicherin Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:09

Dont apologise. You have every right to reply. Especially when you do it in a considered manner.

But I must disagree with you.

"The truth is that no independent Middle Eastern country can afford to have a democracy now. "

Well I suugest that you go and tell that to the Iranian Opposition.

Think about what you wrote there: do you really think that the Iranian Regime should not be overthrown? Should we ignore the pleas for support from Iranian trade-unionists, socialists and feminists?

Well Chomsky, Pilger, Tony Gregory and the RESPECT councillors disagree with you.

by Chicherin Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:20

The execution of 18-year-old Sina Paymard, which was planned to take place on 17 July, has been postponed. Sina Paymard was sentenced to death in Iran for a crime committed when he was just 16 years old. According to reports, Sina Paymard had been moved from Reja'i Shahr prison in Karaj to Tehran's Evin prison for his execution to be carried out on 17 July.

Sina Paymard's lawyer, human rights defender Nasrin Sotudeh, has reported that he was not executed, and his family have been given 10 days to reach a financial settlement with the victim's kin. If the money (blood money) is not raised, then Sina is likely to be executed.

Go to the url here for the full report.

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/irn-180707-news-eng

by Chicherin Wed Jul 25, 2007 16:21

An Iranian teenager awaiting execution for murdering a drug dealer while still a minor is set to be saved from the gallows after his family reached a financial settlement with the victim's kin, his lawyer said Wednesday. A donor came up with the remaining "blood money" demanded by the victim's family to allow Sina Paymard, 19, to be spared death after he was granted a last-minute stay of execution 10 days ago.

Paymard's case has drawn international attention not just over his age but also as he won another stay of execution in 2006 by moving the victim's family to tears with his flute-playing seconds before he was due to be hanged.

"The remaining sum of 800 million [Iranian] riyals [$86,000] was donated by Dr. Rassoul Ganji, a businessman and university professor. It is not the first time he pays to save someone from execution," said lawyer Nasrin Sotudeh. She said that the victim's family now needed to give their formal agreement for the execution to be canceled.