Iran hangs woman despite campaign

[Penelope]

And yet Madeleine Albright said it was a big mistake to put the Shah in, and to interfere. The British wanted a regime change in Iran due to the oil , so they and the US did a coup, which years later led to the 79 uprising. We, we, we, the Shah did our bidding says Reagan, as long as we can have someone in that does out bidding we are fine with it. The Shah was not as innocent as Reagan lets on, and the people wanted him out. He also put lots of people to death and built that prison there. If we cared really about human rights, we would not be friends with Saudi Arabia, but we are. He was trying to explain the Iran Contra affair there.

 

[ChrisL]

You are acting, without evidence, as if a miscarriage of justice occurred. Talk all the babble you want, but it is simply babble.

Amnesty International agrees that it is an atrocity and that Iran does NOT have fair trials. I am quite sure that they know FAR more about the situation in Iran and the court system, how prisoners are treated, etc., than you ever will know. I will listen to their assessments instead of yours.

Amnesty on the death penalty in the USA
FACTS ON THE DEATH PENALTY
Juan Melendez spent 17 years on Florida’s Death Row for a crime he did not commit. In December 2001, his conviction was overturned because prosecutors at his original trial had withheld key evidence.

© amnesty international

The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice. It violates the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, whatever form it takes—electrocution, hanging, gassing, beheading, stoning, shooting or lethal injection.

There can never be any justification for torture or for cruel treatment. Like torture, an execution constitutes an extreme physical and mental assault on an individual. The physical pain caused by the action of killing a human being cannot be quantified, nor can the psychological suffering caused by foreknowledge of death at the hands of the state.

The death penalty is discriminatory and is often used disproportionately against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic and religious communities. It is imposed and carried out arbitrarily. In some countries, it is used as a tool of repression to silence the political opposition.

In other countries, flaws in the judicial process are exacerbated by discrimination, prosecutorial misconduct and inadequate legal representation.

As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated.

The death penalty:

• denies the possibility of rehabilitation and reconciliation.
• promotes simplistic responses to complex human problems, rather than pursuing explanations that could inform positive strategies.
• prolongs the suffering of the murder victim’s family, and extends that suffering to the loved ones of the condemned prisoner.
• diverts resources and energy that could be better used to work against violent crime and assist those affected by it.
• is a symptom of a culture of violence, not a solution to it. It is an affront to human dignity.
• should be abolished. Now.

To be selective because of gender in your disgust re state sanctioned murder is pathetic.

Sure, I'm against the death penalty here in the States too. However, there is no denying that Iran seems to enjoy being particularly brutal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So not has evidentiary claims that discount the legal findings against the woman. End of story.

Do feel free to express your 'feelings'.

 

[ChrisL]

And yet Madeleine Albright said it was a big mistake to put the Shah in, and to interfere. The British wanted a regime change in Iran due to the oil , so they and the US did a coup, which years later led to the 79 uprising. We, we, we, the Shah did our bidding says Reagan, as long as we can have someone in that does out bidding we are fine with it. The Shah was not as innocent as Reagan lets on, and the people wanted him out. He also put lots of people to death and built that prison there. If we cared really about human rights, we would not be friends with Saudi Arabia, but we are. He was trying to explain the Iran Contra affair there.

That is because, unless you wish the US to be isolationists, we have to find a way to deal with unsavory characters. THAT is the way of the world. The world is NOT a nice place. These middle eastern countries seem to be the WORST of the worst when it comes to such things.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We need to be non-interventionist rather than isolationist.

We have no obligation to interfere with Muslim struggles in the ME.

Energy independence would facilitate that position.

 

[Roudy]

And yet Madeleine Albright said it was a big mistake to put the Shah in, and to interfere. The British wanted a regime change in Iran due to the oil , so they and the US did a coup, which years later led to the 79 uprising. We, we, we, the Shah did our bidding says Reagan, as long as we can have someone in that does out bidding we are fine with it. The Shah was not as innocent as Reagan lets on, and the people wanted him out. He also put lots of people to death and built that prison there. If we cared really about human rights, we would not be friends with Saudi Arabia, but we are. He was trying to explain the Iran Contra affair there.

I love it when you two pontificating ignoramuses speak as though you know what you are talking about. The Shah was a patriot who loved his people who did many positive things for Iran. He an ally of the US and the West, and was removed by Western intelligence especially the British, when he started raising oil prices as leader of OPEC.

 

[Roudy]

We need to be non-interventionist rather than isolationist.

We have no obligation to interfere with Muslim struggles in the ME.

Energy independence would facilitate that position.

Agreed. But first we have to build what was broken, otherwise by putting our heads I. The sand, we will end up paying a higher price. The problems will land on our shores, and by then it will be too late.

 

[Roudy]

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

 

[Roudy]

Iran has gone ahead with an execution of a woman despite an international campaign urging a reprieve.

Exactly the same as for Karla Faye Tucker, including the international campaign, but she was executed.
Is Texas the same as Iran and, if not, why not?

Karla Fay admitted to the murder, and US law does not consider its women as unequal, like your shit Shariah law does.

 

[Sally]

What I read she was not executed because of "self defence" as some people claims to blame Islam in a way, but she was executed because of she planned to kill him days ago.

As a good Muslim, I wonder if Mineva can say with a straight face that the women in the Muslim world are treated so kindly. This story should give women pause in going with a man to an isolated house if he tells you he wants you to do some interior decorating for him.

 

[Sally]

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

Many ex Iranians in the Los Angeles area have nothing but good words to say about the Shah. If you kept your nose clean, you had nothing to worry about. It was the Commies with whom he wasn't too happy. After the religious nuts came into power, then you saw a mass exodus out of Iran, and there are still many in Iran who wish they had the opportunity to leave. What I felt bad about is that there were many women and children sent out (both Muslims and Jews), but the fathers stayed to run their businesses and sent money to their families. The only time I eventually saw one of the husbands was when one of them had cancer and came here to die while surrounded by his family.

 

[I.P.Freely]

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

So goy, you and your family were happy to live under the patronage of one of the biggest despots there was. Those who licked the Shah's noble arse and did his murderous bidding were well looked after.It must have been a big shock when the people turned on you scum.No wonder you ran like a rabbit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/w...-iran-comes-to-light.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[I.P.Freely]

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

Many ex Iranians in the Los Angeles area have nothing but good words to say about the Shah. If you kept your nose clean, you had nothing to worry about. It was the Commies with whom he wasn't too happy. After the religious nuts came into power, then you saw a mass exodus out of Iran, and there are still many in Iran who wish they had the opportunity to leave. What I felt bad about is that there were many women and children sent out (both Muslims and Jews), but the fathers stayed to run their businesses and sent money to their families. The only time I eventually saw one of the husbands was when one of them had cancer and came here to die while surrounded by his family.

Just liked Saddam eh Sally

 

[I.P.Freely]

And yet Madeleine Albright said it was a big mistake to put the Shah in, and to interfere. The British wanted a regime change in Iran due to the oil , so they and the US did a coup, which years later led to the 79 uprising. We, we, we, the Shah did our bidding says Reagan, as long as we can have someone in that does out bidding we are fine with it. The Shah was not as innocent as Reagan lets on, and the people wanted him out. He also put lots of people to death and built that prison there. If we cared really about human rights, we would not be friends with Saudi Arabia, but we are. He was trying to explain the Iran Contra affair there.

I love it when you two pontificating ignoramuses speak as though you know what you are talking about. The Shah was a patriot who loved his people who did many positive things for Iran. He an ally of the US and the West, and was removed by Western intelligence especially the British, when he started raising oil prices as leader of OPEC.

you sound just liked the Cuban Bay of Pigs vets,they ran too.

 

[Roudy]

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

So goy, you and your family were happy to live under the patronage of one of the biggest despots there was. Those who licked the Shah's noble arse and did his murderous bidding were well looked after.It must have been a big shock when the people turned on you scum.No wonder you ran like a rabbit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/w...-iran-comes-to-light.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

So goy, you and your family were happy to live under the patronage of one of the biggest despots there was. Those who licked the Shah's noble arse and did his murderous bidding were well looked after.It must have been a big shock when the people turned on you scum.No wonder you ran like a rabbit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/w...-iran-comes-to-light.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Ha ha ha! OMG Are you a fucking illiterate retard or what?! Your article just confirmed everything I said. It cites how things got much worse under the Islamists than they ever were under the Shah! Perhaps you shouldn't provide opinions on things you know Jack Shit about, and in the process save yourself public embarrassment?

"What Mr. Asadi found unimaginable was that the cleric would become president of the Islamic Republic that later imprisoned him again, sentenced him to death and brutally tortured him for six years in the same prison. Today that same cleric is the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Mr. Asadi’s account of torture and imprisonment has offered a rare glimpse into what activists say was a decade of grave human rights violations in Iran. And at a time when international attention has shifted to the nuclear issue and sanctions, they say a campaign to bring justice and accountability through a symbolic tribunal has helped unite a once fractured opposition.

Iranian exiles contend that from 1980 to 1988, 20,000 to 30,000 Iranians were executed in prison and thousands more were tortured. In the summer of 1988, under a fatwa issued by Ayatollah Khomeini, at least 5,000 political prisoners were executed, according to Amnesty International.

The events have been largely ignored by the international community, and accounts from survivors like Mr. Asadi have served as the only form of record. But now a grass-roots campaign has begun to investigate and expose the events in Iranian prisons. The Iran Tribunal, an independent tribunal set up in 2007 by survivors and families of victims, has ruled that the Islamic Republic committed crimes against humanity and gross violations of human rights during the 1980s.

As he recalls watching Mr. Khamenei stare out the window of his cell weeping as he recited Koran and being reprimanded for outbursts of laughter with him while joking together in prison, Mr. Asadi said he would now ask him one question: “Do you remember what you said? You told me no more tears, but now you are torturing people, you are raping our women, you are killing our people.”

 

[Roudy]

And yet Madeleine Albright said it was a big mistake to put the Shah in, and to interfere. The British wanted a regime change in Iran due to the oil , so they and the US did a coup, which years later led to the 79 uprising. We, we, we, the Shah did our bidding says Reagan, as long as we can have someone in that does out bidding we are fine with it. The Shah was not as innocent as Reagan lets on, and the people wanted him out. He also put lots of people to death and built that prison there. If we cared really about human rights, we would not be friends with Saudi Arabia, but we are. He was trying to explain the Iran Contra affair there.

I love it when you two pontificating ignoramuses speak as though you know what you are talking about. The Shah was a patriot who loved his people who did many positive things for Iran. He an ally of the US and the West, and was removed by Western intelligence especially the British, when he started raising oil prices as leader of OPEC.

you sound just liked the Cuban Bay of Pigs vets,they ran too.

It seems you find it amusing when Islamists get to torture and kill Jews. Christians, Bahaiis, Zoorastrians. In other words you're a fucking pig, and proud of it.

 

[Roudy]

Roudy, you are no more authoritative on Iran jurisprudence that Sally et al.

Stop the prejudicial assumptions and tell us why, on the evidence presented, this court reached the wrong decision.

Hint: because it is Iran is not the answer you provide.

Dude, I lived in Iran during the Shah's time. It was extremely corrupt and there was cronyism and bribery rampant in every aspect of life, and it got a thousand times worse when the Islamic lunatics took over. You don't understand how these societies work, You get pulled over by a cop and you give him a $50 and he'd let you off. If the judge doesn't render the verdict he was told to render, his ass is next in the slammer, or worse, he'd be incarcerated on false charges or killed. If you're wealthy and powerful enough, "getting away with murder" is not an expression, it's a fact of life for some people.

I believe in this case the woman was probably innocent. It makes more sense that she was falsely accused and convicted of murder, in order to save the man's reputation and his family "name".

so you ran like a rabbit from the shahs regime ?

The illiterate moron from the trailer park who pees freely has spoken.

Keep up,asshole, the shah was friendly to religious and ethnic minorities, and treated them with respect. Unlike your beloved IslamoNazi animals.

Many ex Iranians in the Los Angeles area have nothing but good words to say about the Shah. If you kept your nose clean, you had nothing to worry about. It was the Commies with whom he wasn't too happy. After the religious nuts came into power, then you saw a mass exodus out of Iran, and there are still many in Iran who wish they had the opportunity to leave. What I felt bad about is that there were many women and children sent out (both Muslims and Jews), but the fathers stayed to run their businesses and sent money to their families. The only time I eventually saw one of the husbands was when one of them had cancer and came here to die while surrounded by his family.

Sally, don't mind this ignorant ahole who pees freely, here is a very interesting interview with the Shah in the late 70's, that clearly forecasts why the West decided to overthrow him. What's amazing is how visionary he was, and decades ahead in predicting the problems that would come to grip the West, many of which we are experiencing today:

 

[JakeStarkey]

Iran has been served poorly by the British, the Russians, the Mossad and MI6 and CIA, the socialists, the Shahites, and the ayatollahs.

No wonder all of my good Persian friends, no matter how much the love their birth country, want to live here.

 

[Roudy]

Iran has been served poorly by the British, the Russians, the Mossand MI6 and CIA, the socialists, the Shahites, and the ayatollahs.

No wonder all of my good Persian friends, no matter how much the love their birth country, want to live here.

Who wants to go back to a country that is governed by Islamic lunatics?

 

[ChrisL]

We need to be non-interventionist rather than isolationist.

We have no obligation to interfere with Muslim struggles in the ME.

Energy independence would facilitate that position.

I agree, but we don't have energy independence right now, and neither does the rest of the world, most of which relies heavily on oil.