 |
   |
|
In this mailing:
Executions
Surge in Iran after Nuclear Talks and Iran off U.S. Terror List
by Shadi Paveh
• April 20, 2015 at 5:00 am
"Terrorism
is not only achieved by bombs but also by terrorizing citizens for
generations through executions. Is the hanging of 700 persons since the
beginning of the 'moderate' Mr. Rouhani's presidency... not a form of
terrorism?" — Mina Ahadi, Founder, ICAE.
"During
the P5+1 nuclear talks there was absolute silence with regards to the high
rate of executions and human rights violations in Iran. Because of this
silence, this matter has taken a turn for the worse." — Mina Ahadi,
Founder, ICAE.
"We
would like to request that the Islamic Republic of Iran be held accountable
by the International community and... sanctions to be placed on the regime
for the high rate of executions." — Mina Ahadi, Founder, ICAE.
As this
article was going to press five more people were hanged in the Central Prison
of Karaj.
After Iran's "nuclear talks," and after it was comfortably
removed as a terrorism threat from the "Worldwide Threat Assessment of
the US Intelligence Communities," the International Committee Against
Executions (ICAE) reported approximately 55 executions in fewer than three
weeks across Iran.
According to Mina Ahadi, Founder of ICAE, various prisoners or their
families had contacted her office weeks before the killings. Prison
authorities, they said, had told the prisoners that they had received orders
from "above" to "cleanse" a large of number of the
prisoners rapidly after the P5+1 talks. The vast majority of these prisoners
had been sentenced to death for non-lethal offences in trials that, according
to activists, often fell dramatically short of international standards.
In an interview with Gatestone, Ms. Ahadi stated:
Down With
Disinvitations
by Daniel Mael
• April 20, 2015 at 4:00 am
The idea
that upholding free speech should require "spine" is a scary
indication of the world that academia is nurturing.
Censorship,
for some, might prevent intellectual or emotional discomfort -- but sometimes
these are as essential to a real education as professors.
The
thought of blocking a speaker on campus should be abhorrent to anyone who
values academic freedom, free speech and the courtesy of at least listening
to statements with which one might -- or might not -- agree.
Who should be allowed to speak on a university campus? This question has
been the subject of debate during the last few years, especially as a growing
sector of college students, faculty, alumni and other stakeholders have begun
objecting to commencement speakers they say they find offensive. As that
trend continued to rise, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
(FIRE) has renamed the commencement period "Disinvitation Season."
In 2014, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice withdrew her
acceptance of an honorary degree from Rutgers University in the face of
protests from both students and faculty, while Brandeis University rescinded
the offer of an honorary degree to women's rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Last fall, students at the University of California at Berkeley objected to
the comedian Bill Maher receiving an honorary degree after hearing his
reservations about extremist Islam.
|
||
|
To subscribe to the this mailing list, go to http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/list_subscribe.php
14 East 60 St., Suite 1001, New York, NY 10022
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment