Posted on 05/03/2012 10:18:03 PM PDT by nuconvert
Prominent human rights advocate and attorney Mohammad Ali Dadkhah, who represents the Christian pastor sentenced to death in Iran in a case that sparked international condemnation, has reportedly been sentenced to nine years in jail for allegedly "acting against national security" in Iran.
Dadkhah has represented several political and human rights activists jailed since Iran's 2009 disputed elections, including Youcef Nadarkhani, the Iranian pastor charged with apostasy and sentenced to death for leaving Islam and converting to Christianity.
"I have been convicted of acting against the national security, spreading propaganda against the regime and keeping banned books at home," Dadkhah told the Guardian. Dadkhah has also reportedly been banned from teaching at universities or practicing law for 10 years
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Iran...where true freedom protests broke out and Obama ignored them and let them be slaughtered.
When he had it in his power to help make regime change there.
problem is, that one would probably have ended up being friendly to the US and out interests.
Instead, Obama supports the take over and defeat of other governments either friendly to us, or neutered by us, in favor of radical Islam regimes that are coming to power.
The conclusion could not be any more obvious.
The Man who Despises America
http://www.jeffhead.com/obama-time.htm
Coming to a country near you...
Its really mind bending when you consider that people have done far worse things and got much lighter sentences.
Its really a twisted world out there. Its amazing we made it this far.
Thankfully, we have the progressive Obama admin working overtime fundamently changing America so we will be on par with the rest of the world.
"Easily done. He's in the next cell..."
9 is the perfect number
May God speed and direct Israel’s Missles.....
Instead, Obama supports the take over and defeat of other governments either friendly to us, or neutered by us, in favor of radical Islam regimes that are coming to power.
Let's remember, that Obama didn't support the protests in 2009 because he said, they were 'internal disputes' between different "factions" of the same Islamic Regime.
To some extent, Obama was correct. Especially, since the media & some "others" kept on portraying Karroubi & Moussavi as "leaders" of the Green Movement. Both of whom have a long track record of being part of the IRI. The latter has had more than a few 'black marks' on his record. And, neither one wanted to see the downfall of IRI. They just wanted to take over from Ahmadi-Nejad.
But, as you say, Obama could've used that opportunity to bring the end of the regime, in its entirety. He chose not to.
However, in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, the emphasis was put on "democracy" and "human rights". So, the Obama type logic, which has not been unique to his administration, suggests that if the people choose an Islamic Regime by democratically voting for it, then that is perfectly acceptable.
All is all, I think there has been too much emphasis on "democracy" in the ME, N. Africa & generally the moslem world, and not enough on actually choosing the best regime to govern, not only domestically, but also in its foreign policy.
We can't continue to transpose western values & practices on others, particularly in the moslem world. Democracy is not a product, it is process that often is historically & culturally-specific. It is a process that, most likely, will take generations to introduce & embed in Iran & generally other Islamic nations.
Naturally, you've to start somewhere. So, firstly, any "radical Islamic" regime requires a radical change, politically & socially - when necessary, by force. Once that is accomplished, we can embark on introducing democracy. Ultimately, it is about "Cultural Change".
Yes, So? As a lawyer in Islamic Republic, he should fully understand & know that those charges stem from the Constitution of Islamic Republic.
Any thing that is against "Islam", stated in the Islamic Republic Constitution, would, naturally, be interpreted as "against the national (mullahs regime) security, etc..
He should be thankful he is only banned for 10 yrs for practicing law & 9 yrs in jail. He could've been hanged ALREADY for defending an apostate (convert out of Islam).
Then again, after 9 yrs in jail, unless he is given some Chelo-Kabob in the interim, he'd be hoping he was dead already.
You’re absolutely correct, my friend.
I’ve often wondered why it has not been done so far.
In fact, we’ve facilitated & expedited the propagation of Islam in Islamic countries as well as the West.
Shakespeare had it right.
I sincererly apologize for finding ironic humor in this.
Perhaps He has a better plan that doesn’t decimate as many of His children in Iran. God can be pretty clever sometimes, huh? Just a thought.
I don’t know if you believe that there is a one world government effort going on, but I do believe that this is happening and I believe that the one worlders of the West are trying to include the Islamic world. For instance, Sarcozy is on the record as supporting a Mediterranean Union which will be an expansion of the European Union. The Mediterranean Union will include Islamic countries in the southern shore of the Mediterranean. The New World Order types are totally delusional, they seem to believe that they are all knowing and all poweful. It seems that they think that somehow they will end up being in control of the Islamic world and not the other way around.
The massive importation of Muslims into the European Union is an attempt to erase the history and culture of the European people so that they can be blended into the one world system.
The Muslims are being given the upper hand by Hilary Clinton, Obama and all the others behind the scene. They are trying to sacrifice Israel, the European people, the Jews in Europe, religious minorities in Muslim countries and even predominately Christian African countries like Cote D’Ivoire. I think they are trying to knock down strong Middle East leaders like Mubarrak and have them replaced with new leaders like the Muslim Brotherhood, thinking that they can get on their good side.
I know we’ve had this conversation a few months ago.
I think you might be correct there or at least onto something there.
It certainly is very strange. And, it doesn’t seem to be out of ‘lack of knowledge’ on their part. It seems to be done deliberately. And, it all started with Khomeini in Iran back in 1979. They got rid of the Shah then too (similar to Mobarak in Egypt). Actually, the Shah said things over 30 yrs ago, along the same lines as you’re saying now. He put the emphasis on oil as well and big energy corporations. Back then, many accused him of being delusional & paranoid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.