Yet another Which-Side-Is-Obama-On Alert: "Obama Cuts Off Funding for Iranian Human-Rights Documentation," by Michael Rubin at The Corner, October 6 (thanks to Banafsheh):
I've got to say, even for the Obama administration, this is a real shocker.
The Clinton State Department has decided to cut off all funding for the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC), which was compiling lists of protestors imprisoned in this summer's unrest, as well as those who were killed in the crackdown.
IHRDC is what human-rights advocates should be: methodical, precise, and apolitical in their work. And yet, the Obama administration has, without explanation, cut off all federal funding to the group which has consistently fulfilled its mandate.
Anyone, across the political spectrum who has any interest in human rights in Iran keeps the IHRDC reports on their desks.
Perhaps a stupid attempt at yet more appeasement?
Incidentally, did anyone listen to NPR's "Talk of the Nation" today? Juan Cole, a professor of Middle Eastern studies, insisted that no one should worry about Iran developing or using nuclear weapons because some senior Iranian clerics have proclaimed that "widespread killing of innocents" is "contrary to Islam." Cole stated repeatedly that since Iran is an Islamic state, we should rest assured that they would never do anything so "un-Islamic."
I was gratified that at least the NPR host and the other guest (whose name I did not catch) sounded dubious about Cole's claims, to say the least.
are we sure that hes not a muslim ,from his actions it sure looks like it. or could mrs clinton be cutting funding for her own reasons
"IHRDC is what human-rights advocates should be: methodical, precise, and apolitical in their work." -Rubin
The IHRDC is "a center for the systematic, objective and analytical documentation of human rights violations committed in the Islamic Republic of Iran since the 1979 revolution."
PR Newswire US
October 6, 2004 Wednesday
Iranian Human Rights Documentation Center Established by Griffin Center for Health and Human Rights
They only document human rights abuses since 1979, but they are "apolitical"! I guess they started from 1979 since it is well known that SAVAK never committed any human rights violations, and starting from 1979 has no political subtext whatsoever.
The cutoff saves taxpayer money, which can then go to help the Palestinians and ACORN. Can I have some too?
kaffirchick-
Juan Cole is an enemy of the United States. He is secretly funded by the Moslem movement.
He has drank the poisonous Islamic Kool Aid and now he wants everyone else to drink it as well. Of course the money he is secretly paid helps. He would love nothing more than for Iran to get nukes and use them on both Israel and the United States. That would delight him. He should be deported to Antarctica, where he can spread his vile moslem propaganda to the penguins. Juan Cole is the worst of Islamic deceivers.. In fact he is so bad that even the NPR host and guest noticed what a sleazy deceptive lowlife he really is..............
This agent of deception hates America and the West and wants to see it all destroyed.
It would delight him.
SAVAK did indeed commit human rights violations but they pale in comparison to those committed by the religious fruitcakes who have governed Iran since 1979. One knows this or should know it. Those who don't are morally myopic.
Good grief!
I did a search of JW for the IHRDC. This organization has not appeared once on JW. If they were digging up anything important on Iran, wouldn't they have shown up here at least once? Why all the tears for an organization nobody knew existed?
Most are surprised by this, I am surprised by what took so long?
Updates on failed Dallas mujahid Hosam Smadi. It appears that he not only had a gun and ammunition in his house, but made a martyrdom video (like those made by other jihad terrorists) which he hoped to have sent to Osama bin Laden in event of succeeding in his desired jihad attack.
nothing surprise me anymore from any government run by the far left Demoncrats. obama and his groupies will make sure the terrorist sponsoring states will be treated with more love and respect. Obama is Carter in black.
I think one of the reasons the IHRDC started in 1979 is because that is when the government of Iran began an international assassination program.
They document 162 assassinations committed outside of Iran, all over the world, including the United States.
For example -
"Ali Akbar Tabatabai was shot dead at his home in Maryland, U.S.A., on July 22,1980. Tabatabai, a well-known figure in diplomatic circles, had served as a former press attaché for the Iranian Embassy in Washington, D.C.
After the revolution, he became a vocal critic of Ayatollah Khomeini and made a number of appearances in the U.S. media.
He was the founder and president of the Iran Freedom Foundation, an organization opposed to the Islamic Republic and dedicated to the creation of a secular democracy in Iran.
He was assassinated five days before a planned anti-Khomeini demonstration he had been organizing and only an hour before a scheduled radio interview.
Tabatabai’s assassin, David Belfield, also known as Daoud Salahuddin, fled to Tehran where he received a warm welcome.
An African-American Muslim convert who became involved with pro-Khomeini activists in the late 1970s, Salahuddin has since repeatedly described the details of the assassination and his relationship with representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
In an interview featured in the 2006 documentary American Fugitive, Salahuddin nonchalantly recounted, “when [Tabatabai] came to the door for a signature, I shot him. Simple.”"
http://www.iranhrdc.org/httpdocs/English/pdfs/Reports/No-Safe-Haven_May08.pdf
They seem pretty professional, and doing a good thing.
I don’t see anyone here overreacting.
Is there something we should know?
Are you just defending the Islamic Republic of Iran?
What’s your point?
You wrote: "If they were digging up anything important on Iran, wouldn't they have shown up here at least once?"
Maybe. Maybe not. Don't you think the host has his hands full?
Hey, dave742, your weakling efforts to exculpate Islam (once again) are far more noticeable than you will ever realize to those of us who grasp that Mohammed's creed is the ultimate cult in man's history. Oh yeah, my money is on you never gettin' this; your ignorance is big time and kinda' sad. Prediction here: you will waste the rest of your life defending an indefensible, deeply false and malicious ideology, sorta' like Nazis and Marxists of old did. In short, you're a loser.
"Juan Cole ... insisted that no one should worry about Iran developing or using nuclear weapons because some senior Iranian clerics have proclaimed that "widespread killing of innocents" is "contrary to Islam."
Of course, as everyone here knows "innocents" are defined in Islam as only pertaining to Muslims. Non-Muslims are not included in this category. Presumably Iran could use nuclear weapons on non-Muslims with a clear conscience because the victims would not be "innocents" and it would all be "legal" in the minds of "senior Iranian clerics" (who undoubtedly play a role in providing "legal" cover for Iranian nuclear doctrine). Of course, Juan Cole could not be bothered to confuse the issue with this important piece of clarifying information. And no one at NPR could be counted on to ask for it.
I think one of the reasons the IHRDC started in 1979 is because that is when the government of Iran began an international assassination program.
They document 162 assassinations committed outside of Iran, all over the world, including the United States.
For example -
"Ali Akbar Tabatabai was shot dead at his home in Maryland, U.S.A., on July 22,1980. Tabatabai, a well-known figure in diplomatic circles, had served as a former press attaché for the Iranian Embassy in Washington, D.C.
After the revolution, he became a vocal critic of Ayatollah Khomeini and made a number of appearances in the U.S. media.
He was the founder and president of the Iran Freedom Foundation, an organization opposed to the Islamic Republic and dedicated to the creation of a secular democracy in Iran.
He was assassinated five days before a planned anti-Khomeini demonstration he had been organizing and only an hour before a scheduled radio interview.
Tabatabai’s assassin, David Belfield, also known as Daoud Salahuddin, fled to Tehran where he received a warm welcome.
An African-American Muslim convert who became involved with pro-Khomeini activists in the late 1970s, Salahuddin has since repeatedly described the details of the assassination and his relationship with representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
In an interview featured in the 2006 documentary American Fugitive, Salahuddin nonchalantly recounted, “when [Tabatabai] came to the door for a signature, I shot him. Simple.”"
http://www.iranhrdc.org/httpdocs/English/pdfs/Reports/No-Safe-Haven_May08.pdf
They seem pretty professional, and doing a good thing.
I don’t see anyone here overreacting.
Is there something we should know?
Are you just defending the Islamic Republic of Iran?
What’s your point?
livingengine:
"What’s your point?"
I thought I made my point clear. I guess I'll do it again in a different way and hope that it is even more clear. Michael Rubin called the IHRDC an "apolitical" human rights organization. This organization, however, only documents abuses since the day that the US puppet regime was overthrown. To anyone who has a shred of objectivity, this fact obviously disqualifies the organization as being "apolitical." Politics is a painfully obvious factor in the way this organization conducts itself. Truly apolitical human rights organizations do not only start cataloging human rights violations when a change in political leadership occurs. This should be easy to understand.
When Russian satellite countries gained their independence, if Russian human right organizations immediately began cataloging human rights abuses in those countries that gained independence, would you call those organizations "apolitical"?
SAVAK was also responsible for assasinations, you know.
My other point is that nobody here knew the hell these people were, and now you are all weepy for them. Please.
livingengine:
As for Ali Akbar Tabatabai, a Lexis Nexis search of him reveals that the MSM has written 187 articles about him over the years. I think they were doing an OK job of documenting that situation all by themselves. I don't think we need to pay a separate organization millions of dollars to write about something that already has 187 articles written about it.
I wonder, did the Dhimmi-crats get orders from President Ape-madinejad to lay off funding for Human Rights violations in Iran or did the United Islamic Nations Human Rights Council order it?
But the abuses pre-1979 have been stopped by the Khomeini regime, and replaced by a different set of abuses. So why should MSM be expected to deal also with these earlier abuses, if they are not happening anymore? And why suddenly stop funding this organisation, when post-election time, abuses are in Iran on the increase?
It is rather inconvenient to negotiate with a regime that engages in such activities, so it is best not to mention them. President Obama apparently would have negotiated with Pol Pot if there were some positive spin and a photo op to be had from it. He seems to reserve his wrath for Honduras and Israel.
Just another step toward appeasing the enemies of America, and hurting those who are being oppressed by these gangsters!
antijihadist:
"But the abuses pre-1979 have been stopped by the Khomeini regime"
Yes. I understand to some extent. My intent was to make a passing comment about the word "apolitical." The fact that an organization that started in 2002 would even bother to look at anything from more than a decade ago reeks of politics. A human rights organization that is funded by the government (and not an ngo), that only looks at one country, which just happens to be that countries number one declared enemy, reeks of politics. Most people, even from the country that is receptive to the demonization of the target country, will recognize this. An organization like HRW will be listened to by a large percentage of people, but the IHRDC will not be noticed by anyone. Analogies can be useful, and I think it is useful to think about how a Russian-funded organization that catalogues abuses by former Russian satellite countries only would be viewed. Is anyone other than patriotic Russian extremists going to listen to what that group says? Of course, maybe the target audience of the IHRDC was exactly that - American extremist patriots. But even in that case, it does not make sense, because even blogs like JW (and Hot Air as well), also do not pay attention to them.
Sometimes, bogus organiztions like this are set up to create lies that can then be passed off as reality by the MSM. In a recent JW thread, I became aware of a human rights organization that was set up in Afghanistan by the US just after the invasion, and they were indeed creating bogus stats for use by the media. As far as I can tell, the IHRDC was not even doing that. I really can't figure out why they exist, and I'd rather not pay for them with my tax money.
This is not surprising news. I predicted from the start that his first term would be one of peace and consiliation, and this would lead to a second term. Here you will see the true Obama as he sells out the West to the Islamists.Whom I believe is is one.