Monday, November 24, 2008

Where did it go wrong?

71-81... that's a pretty bad margin when last year it was 78-79. I am talking about the vote that defeated the no-action motion that Iran put forward at the UN so that its violation of human rights not be discussed.

After all the efforts (and money) our government spent on this, it is pretty bad, particularly because our economy is blooming and we are all happy campers.

Makes us all forget why there was a resolution in the first place, particularly if one listens to the statements of the Iranian representative (sorry this one is in Persian), so you may want to peruse the UN Secretary General's report about it (then scroll down to A/C3/459).

Friday, August 08, 2008

The man

I have not been blogging in a long time because things are so much the same (but in a worse manner) in Iran that I feel the only thing I would be doing is reapeating myself over and over again.

But Mr. Qaddafi came out with such a surprising statement (I know, he is good at doing that but hey...) that I had to post it.

Wednesday, May 07, 2008

A women's rights defender

Don't you love it when Mr. Ahmadinejad implies that the US is not advanced enough to elect a woman as president?

A MehrNews wire was quoted in the New York Times but unfortunately, I was not able to find the original article.

We all know what the situation in Iran is. I have blogged about it a number of times and things aren't getting better.

But my question to our president is: can a woman be elected as President in Iran in the first place? And since he said that: "Presidency of a woman in a country that boasts its gunmanship is unlikely." Does it mean that Iran is also great at boasting its gunmanship? (and I have no wish to posts links about this...)

Saturday, April 05, 2008

Well said

This is almost a "linkduni", as some other bloggers like to call it, since I have really nothing to add to what a Swiss himself has written about the visit of Micheline Calmy-Rey to Iran. It is just the pathetic continuation of what I blogged about here and then here.

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Out of the Calif's chest

It seems that our Minister of Foreign Affairs has been learning melodrama: his speech, or rather the opening of his speech at the Human Rights Council last Tuesday was quite well orchestrated: he goes to the Podium, pauses, drinks a glass of water, clears his throat, straightens his goatee, pauses again, makes a reference to the heart-breaking individual case of a six-months old infant and then asks for a minute of silence.

And then he makes yet another bold move: requests that during this minute of silence Muslims in the room recite the "fatehe" and starts reciting it under his breath (and it can be slightly heard in the microphone).

(this year, the webcast is a little less practical, so to watch it, you need to go here, then choose the morning session and then go more than 3/4 into the webcast).


Perhaps he was competing with Mr. Ahmadinejad's halo a couple of years ago.

Aside from his blatant untruthfulness concerning Iran's human rights record in the rest of his speech there are a couple of points that can be raised and are a clear reflection of the behaviour of this government:

Firstly, he uses the Persian pronunciation of an Arab word, and therefore refers to "ghazzeh" (instead of Gaza), so that most people, I am sure, must have been wondering what he is talking about;

but more importantly announces that he sacrifices a minute of his speech and then speaks for 20 minutes instead of the allotted 10, thus, in fact, taking 10 minutes of the time of the following speakers.

In Persian one would say that he is making a donation out of the Caliph's chest.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Davos, bis and worse

OK, one more on Davos and then I stop, but there is no way I cannot reiterate how anything can be said and not be challenged, I really wonder what the point is.

Or is it perhaps the Open Forum? Because, I must admit that when Mr. Mottaki and Mr. Hashemi Shajareh had to face Mr. Khalilzad, things were quite different, although the latter go some heat for it afterwards, it seems.

But lo and behold, it was truly painful to hear yet another time Ayatollah Hadavi:

" I suggest it, if the is a group of expertise in human rights, they come and they evaluate the human rights situation in Iran and in the United States and give a neutral report about the situation and you can say the human rights situation in Iran is worse than the human rights in the United States, I would like you to do this, because some of the Americans have done it before and they say that the human rights situation in the United States is worse than the human rights situation in Iran. I am not saying so, a Jewish professor in the United States said it in 2004."

The name of that famous professor will remain forever unknown... and, of course, we will completely overlook all of the UN human rights reports made by experts...

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Unanswered in Davos

Mr. Khatami was once more invited to Davos for the World Economic Forum. This time he spoke at the Open Forum.

He has certainly succeeded in establishing himself as one of the darlings of the West and a kind of moderate Muslim cleric that can be talked to.

However, the most painful of all is to hear him make statements such as (I changed a little the words of the translator to make it more accurate):

"But if the intervention of religion in political life would mean to limit life, or if religion would not appreciate the human values, or would like to take away from men freedom which is one of the greatest benedictions of God, that kind of religion and interference would be a loss and the society would never accept it."

or "In the Islamic revolution people demanded freedom, independence and progress based on religion. And this is why an Islamic Republic was established. An Islamic Republic means a democratic government, where women are free, there is freedom of thought, the elections would establish the power, etc. and because people are Muslim the religious values should be present, but these religious values should not contradict these basis."

or "I don't think that in Iran anyone is prosecuted because of his religious beliefs, and if he is, this is wrong."

and that no one can (or wishes to) ask him: Mr. Khatami, you were President of Iran for 8 years, how come these lofty statements were nowhere to be implemented then?