Monday, 31 August 2015
Sunday, 30 August 2015
How can US and EU support this sort of regime?
Take a look at these facts please:
These are photos showing a 14-year-old boy getting married to his 10-year-old partner in Iran have gone viral on social media. The couple, who are under the legal marriage age in Iran, reportedly got married on Aug. 14, after having obtained permission from authorities. The pair were seen with their proud families in some of the pictures.
In the Islamic Republic Iran, girls can marry as young as 13 provided they have the permission of their father. Boys can marry from the age of 15.
Despite being legally dubious, as many as 42,000 children aged between 10 and 14 married in 2010, according to Iranian news website Tabnak.
And how about this US and EU leaders, you also support this sort of torture as you do deals with the regime that has no intention at all to become humane as the gruel Sharia laws are endemic in their way of life as its a state based on one book alone and that the Koran.
Laws cant be taken away from their book just like anything else cant be taken away.
US and EU needs to learn this.
Iran regime sentences man to have eyes gouged out and US and EU thinks all is fine!
The mullahs' inhuman regime in Iran has sentenced a young man to be blinded.
The cruel and medieval sentence was handed down on Saturday (August 1) to the 27-year-old man only identified by his first name Hamed.
Hamed had told the regime's court that in March 2011, when he was 23 years old, he unintentionally caused an eye injury to another young man in a street fight, according to the official state-run Iran newspaper.
What Obama and his EU leader friends don't seem to understand is that these savage acts which constitute torture are enshrined in the Iranian regime’s laws. In other words its common day justice in Iran....
At least four people were hanged in public in Iran last month. Such public hangings also constitute a form of public torture. Especially as the hanging is slow and barbaric and the person is usually lifted up slowly and strangled to death slowly.
When people are urged to go to the scene, everyone who is faced with that sight is also tortured by that barbaric act. One must ask: Why has the US and EU and UN closed its eyes to these atrocities.” ?
The Iranian regime's judiciary officials have publicly defended limb amputations, eye gouging, and even stoning to death as a very real part of their judicial law.
Utterly ironically Mohammad-Javad Larijani, the head of the Iranian regime's 'Human Rights Council', said on April 10, 2014: “The problem is that the West does not understand that Qisas (law of retribution) is different from execution. We are not ashamed of stoning or any of the Islamic decrees.”
“No one has the right to tell a judge to avert some sentences because the United Nations gets upset. We should firmly and seriously defend the sentence of stoning.”
He has also said: "Retaliation and punishment are beautiful and necessary things.
He further continued:It’s a form of protection for the individual and civil rights of the people in a society. The executioner or the person administering the sentence is in fact very much a defender of human rights.
One can say that there is humanity in the act of retaliation."
And so the story continues just like nothing has happened and while the US and EU leaders watch the TV news...
The Iranian regime amputated the hand and foot of an inmate in a prison in Mashhad, northeast Iran. The prisoner, only identified as Rahman K., had his right hand and left foot severed by the authorities.
A second prisoner is awaiting the same sentence imminently.
On June 28 this year the fundamentalist regime amputated the fingers of two prisoners in the same prison in Mashhad.
Since Hassan Rouhani took office as president of the clerical regime in 2013, more than 1,800 people have been executed and hundreds more have been subjected to degrading and inhumane punishments such as amputation, flogging in public and being paraded in streets.
In May 2015, a high ranking Iranian cleric, who is the representative of the regime’s Supreme Leader in Hormozgan province (southern Iran), called for more inhumane punishments of hand amputations to be carried out.
While visiting Mashhad, Ghulam-Ali Naeem Abadi said: “If the hands of a few of those who commit theft in society are cut off, they would serve as examples for others and security will be restored.”
“Security would be restored in society by amputating a few fingers; why then are such punishments not being fully implemented?” he asked.
Last December, the United Nations General Assembly slammed the flagrant violations of human rights by the Iranian regime. The resolution criticised the Iranian regime's use of inhuman punishments, including flogging and amputations. But what good does any UN resolution do today when its hardly even noticed by the media.
The UN’s 61st resolution on human rights abuses in Iran also censured the mullahs’ dictatorship for the rise in executions, public hangings and the execution of juveniles.
It may be so but as long as the leaders don't get these reports shown to them and why these resolutions are made the entire UN is of no use or help to the needy.
The atrocities get even worse as the Iranian regime notices that not even the western media are allowed to report in detail how sick the punishments are in the news.
This can be proved many times over .....
Did you think the EU and US leadership did know that the Iranian regime unveiled a terrifying device in 2013 to the public which is uses to chop off fingers?
The device that looks like something devised for a grisly horror movie operates as a circular saw that guillotines prisoners’ fingers.
Naturally the western media did use their time for better and looked comfortably the other way....
The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) has repeatedly condemned the medieval punishments carried out by the clerical regime in Iran and has called for the referral of the regime's appalling human rights record to the UN Security Council.
But that helps just as little as this article will.
EU and US leadership need´s to find back to human values before it´s too late
and all the world becomes like Iran or Hitlers 3rd Reich. Because that's what is in the making unless we do something now....
Sebastian Kurz is an Austrian politician, who has been Austria's Minister for Foreign Affairs
and Integration since 2013. He is a member of the Austrian People's Party
Austria's Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz says the Dublin regulation, which is part of the EU's asylum policy, is not working. We reported on the Dublin II regulation just a few days ago regarding the migration storm, and find Austria's Foreign Minister truly honest in comparison to most "EU consensus politicians" who many have no idea about the regulation and how little the regulation actually functions....
We have added the Dublin regulation made simple as published by EU LEX below.
Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz told media that the system means asylum seekers must make their applications in the first EU country they reach.
And this has been broken by most EU nations by now sending migrants who have landed in Italy and Greece further to other nations which all to clearly brakes EU law.
Foreign Minister Sebastian Kurz says passport-free travel between most European states could also be in danger. And he is very - very right indeed!
Some EU top leaders who think they can just play consensus without considering the existing laws and regulations. To send a refugee without a visa within EU is and stays illegal and only the receiving nation can give or reject visa.
Why would all EU nations now suddenly be given additional migrants by other nations from within the Union instead of helping to strengthen the borders?
To us at SDR migrants are not to be dealt with like Merkel & co´s beloved EU bailouts that push consequences far into the future rather than, standing tall facing the facts and dealing with the problem here and now, as we used to do in the west.
A legal matter that is utterly neglected is the fact, that its illegal for EU to help criminal traffickers.
Because by not rejecting to submit to their criminal scheme the EU makes it self part of a crime. ,in theory.
Right now we suspect that the EU laws don't matter to our leaders, because as they brake them they just fast change the laws to avoid prosecution.
After all: If the possibility is there, the deed is not far away
SDR wishes for the best but fear the worst......
EUR-Lex - l33153 - EN - EUR-Lex
Dublin II Regulation
The objective of this Regulation is to identify as quickly as possible the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application, and to prevent abuse of asylum procedures.
Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national.
This Regulation establishes the principle that only one Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application. The objective is to avoid asylum seekers from being sent from one country to another, and also to prevent abuse of the system by the submission of several applications for asylum by one person.
The objective and hierarchical criteria are therefore defined in order to identify the Member State responsible for each asylum application.
The criteria are to be applied in the order in which they are presented in the Regulation and on the basis of the situation existing when the asylum seeker first lodged his/her application with a Member State.
- Principle of family unity
Where the asylum seeker is an unaccompanied minor, the Member State responsible for examining his/her application is the Member State where a member of his/her family is legally present, provided that this is in the best interest of the minor. In the absence of a family member, the Member State responsible is that where the minor has lodged his/her application for asylum.
For adults, where the asylum seeker has a family member who has been allowed to reside as a refugee in a Member State, or if the application for this person is underway, that Member State will be responsible for examining the asylum application, provided that the person concerned so desires.
In addition, asylum applications submitted simultaneously or on close dates by several members of a family can be examined together.
- Issuance of residence permits or visas
Where the asylum seeker is in possession of a valid residence document or visa, the Member State that issued it will be responsible for examining the asylum application. Where the asylum seeker is in possession of more than one valid residence document or visa issued by different Member States, the responsibility for examining the asylum application will be assumed by the Member State that issued the residence document conferring the right to the longest period of residency.
The same rules apply where the asylum seeker is in possession of one or more residence documents that expired less than two years earlier or one or more visas that expired less than six months earlier, but where the asylum seeker has not left the territories of the Member States.
- Illegal entry or stay in a Member State
Where the asylum seeker has irregularly crossed the border into a Member State, that Member State will be responsible for examining the asylum application. This responsibility ceases 12 months after the date on which the border has been illegally crossed.
When the asylum seeker has been living for a continuous period of at least five months in a Member State before lodging his/her asylum application, that Member State becomes responsible for examining the application. Where the applicant has been living for a period of time of at least five months in several Member States, the Member State where he/she lived most recently shall be responsible for examining the application.
- Legal entry in a Member State
Where a third-country national applies for asylum in a Member State where he/she is not subject to a visa requirement, that Member State will be responsible for examining the asylum application.
- Application in an international transit area of an airport
Where a third-country national applies for asylum in an international transit area of an airport of a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.
If no Member State can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed, the first Member State with which the asylum application was lodged will be responsible for examining it.
At the request of another Member State, any Member State may accept to examine an asylum application for humanitarian reasons based in part on family or cultural considerations, provided that the persons concerned consent.
Taking charge of the asylum applicant
The Member State designated as responsible for the asylum application must take charge of the applicant and process the application.
If a Member State to which an asylum application was submitted deems that another Member State is responsible, it can call on that Member State to take charge of the application. A request to take charge or to take back should provide all the information for the Member State requested to determine whether it is actually responsible. Where the requested State accepts to take charge of or to take back the person concerned, a reasoned decision stating that the application is inadmissible in the State in which it was lodged and that there is the obligation to transfer the asylum seeker to the Member State responsible is sent to the applicant.
The Dublin II Regulation replaces the 1990 Dublin Convention which set the criteria relating to a country responsible for processing an asylum application. All EU Member States shall apply the Regulation, including Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Liechtenstein.
Entry into force
Deadline for transposition in the Member States
Regulation (EC) No 343/2003
OJ L 50 of 25.2.2003
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (Recast) [COM(2008) 820 final/2 – Not published in the Official Journal].
This proposal to amend the Dublin II Regulation aims to enhance the system's efficiency and to ensure that the needs of applicants for international protection are comprehensively addressed under the responsibility determination procedure. Moreover, in line with the Policy Plan on Asylum, the proposal is aimed at addressing situations of particular pressure on Member States' reception capacities and asylum systems, as well as situations where there is an inadequate level of protection for applicants for international protection.
Codecision procedure (COD/2008/0243)
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the evaluation of the Dublin system [COM(2007) 299 final – Official Journal C 191 of 17.8.2007]. According to the Commission, the objectives of the Dublin system have, on the whole, been achieved. The Commission explains that, owing to the lack of precise data from the Member States, it has not been able to evaluate the cost of the system, and that some concerns remain in terms of both the practical application and the effectiveness of the system.
Saturday, 29 August 2015
“If the US knows the location of these camps, and the US president wants to destroy ISIS, why are the camps still functioning?” Excellent question. And no answer was forthcoming.
Why not? Is it because there could be no possible explanation for this that makes sense in terms of American national security and that of the free world?
“Pentagon Not Targeting Islamic State Training Camps,” by Bill Gertz, Washington Free Beacon, August 28, 2015.
The Pentagon has not conducted airstrikes against an estimated 60 Islamic State (IS) training camps that are supplying thousands of fighters each month to the terror group, according to defense and intelligence officials.
The camps are spread throughout Islamic State-controlled areas of Iraq and Syria and are off limits in the U.S.-led international bombing campaign because of concerns about collateral damage, said officials familiar with planning and execution of the yearlong bombing campaign.
Additionally, the IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL) camps have been so successful that Islamic State leaders are considering expanding the camps to Libya and Yemen. Both states have become largely ungoverned areas in recent years.
The failure to target the training camps with U.S. and allied airstrikes is raising questions among some defense and intelligence officials about the commitment of President Obama and his senior aides to the current anti-IS strategy of degrading and ultimately destroying the terror group.
“If we know the location of these camps, and the president wants to destroy ISIS, why are the camps still functioning?” one official critical of the policy asked.
The camps are regarded by U.S. intelligence analysts as a key element in the terror group’s successes in holding and taking new territory. The main benefit of the training camps is that they are providing a continuous supply of new fighters.
An additional worry of intelligence analysts is that some of the foreign fighters being trained in the camps will eventually return to their home countries in Europe and North America to carry out terror attacks.
A White House spokesman declined to comment on the failure to bomb the terror camps and referred questions to the Pentagon.
Pentagon spokesman Maj. Roger M. Cabiness declined to say why no training camps have been bombed. “I am not going to be able to go into detail about our targeting process,” he said.
Cabiness said the U.S.-led coalition has “hit ISIL [an alternative abbreviation for the Islamic State] with more than 6,000 airstrikes.”
“The coalition has also taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories, and training camps,” he said. “We have also stuck their leadership, including most recently on Aug. 18 when a U.S. military airstrike removed Fadhil Ahmad al-Hayali, also known as Hajji Mutazz, the second in command of the terrorist group, from the battlefield.”
Efforts also are being taken to disrupt IS finances and “make it more difficult for the group to attract new foreign fighters,” Cabiness said in an email.
A Central Command spokesman also declined to provide details of what he said were “operational engagements” against IS training camps.
“Once a target is identified as performing a hostile act, or is part of an obvious hostile force, a training camp for example, we prosecute that target in accordance with the coalition rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict,” the spokesman said.
According to the defense and intelligence officials, one reason the training camps have been off limits is that political leaders in the White House and Pentagon fear hitting them will cause collateral damage. Some of the camps are located near civilian facilities and there are concerns that casualties will inspire more jihadists to join the group.
However, military officials have argued that unless the training camps are knocked out, IS will continue to gain ground and recruit and train more fighters for its operations.
Disclosure that the IS training camps are effectively off limits to the bombing campaign comes as intelligence officials in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and U.S. Central Command, which is in charge of the conflict, have alleged that senior U.S. officials skewed intelligence reports indicating the U.S. strategy against IS is not working or has been less effective than officials have claimed in public.
The Islamic State controls large parts of Syria and Iraq and has attracted tens of thousands of jihadists in both countries and from abroad. The exact number of fighters is not known but intelligence estimates have indicated the numbers have increased over the past year.
The military campaign, known as Operation Inherent Resolve, appears to be floundering despite a yearlong campaign of airstrikes and military training programs aimed to bolstering Iraqi military forces.
A review of Central Command reports on airstrikes since last year reveals that no attacks were carried out against training camps.
Targets instead included Islamic State vehicles, buildings, tactical units, arms caches, fighting positions, snipers, excavators, mortar and machine gun positions, bunkers, and bomb factories.
The risk-averse nature of the airstrike campaign was highlighted last month by Brig. Gen. Thomas Weidley, chief of staff for what the military calls Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.
“The coalition continues to use air power responsibly,” Weidley said July 1. “Highly precise deliveries, detailed weaponeering, in-depth target development, collateral damage mitigation, and maximized effects on Daesh, are characteristics of coalition airstrike operation in Iraq and Syria.”
Daesh is another name for the Islamic State.
“The coalition targeting process minimizes collateral damage and maximizes precise effects on Daesh,” Weidley said earlier. “Air crews are making smart decisions and applying tactical patience every day.”
Other coalition spokesman have indicated that targeting has been limited to reaction strikes against operational groups of IS fighters. “When Daesh terrorists expose themselves and their equipment, we will strike them,” Col. Wayne Marotto said May 27.
The military website Long War Journal published a map showing 52 IS training camps and noted that some may no longer be operating because of the U.S.-led bombing campaign.
According the map, among the locations in Iraq and Syria where IS is operating training camps are Mosul, Raqqah, Nenewa, Kobane, Aleppo, Fallujah, and Baiji.
MEMRI.(The Middle East Media Research Institute) obtained a video of an IS training camp in Nenewa Province, Iraq, dated Oct. 1, 2014. The video shows a desert outpost with tan tents and around 100 fighters who take part in hand-to-hand combat exercises, weapons training, and religious indoctrination….
We have recently reported on a systematic genocide of Christians by Muslims in the
Middle East and he Gulf nations as well as in Pakistan and many African nations.
Today we report on Egypt.
Another Coptic Christian soldier has been killed at his army unit under mysterious
circumstances, according to MCN.
On Sunday, August 23, Baha Saeed Karam, 22, "was killed by four bullets"
at the headquarters of his battalion in Marsa Matruh.
Although transferred to a hospital in Alexandria, he died upon arrival.
According to Baha’s brother, Cyril, the Coptic soldier had told him previously
that he had gotten into some quarrels with other soldiers in his unit and that
they had threatened him with death.
Baha is not the first Coptic Christian soldier in Egypt to be killed while
stationed with his unit under so called “mysterious” circumstances.
Two months earlier, another young Coptic soldier who by the way was
the only Christian in his unit was found dead, shot and bludgeoned on the head.
The army claimed he had committed suicide.
four bullets in the head a suicide ?
What do you think ?
We will keep an eye on Egypt´s killing of Christians and hope that all US and EU
take note on this actual almost systematic killing of Christians in Egypt even if
General Sissi at first seemed as a good partner to the west this shows us thatch is
everything we feared the that the Muslim Brotherhood would be to the Christians
General Sissi should remember that no land that kills Christians will have much
future doing any sort of trade with EU US. In other words face stone age as a
silent kiss in return......telling goodbye to tourism.
We might be kind in EU and US but we are not stupid!