TwitterGCMicon86x90vert
Books on Global Conflict, War, Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Military Equipment
FacebookFBGCMicon86x90vert

Categorized | 24/7 ALERTS!

Iranian Opposition Activists Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour Executed in Iran

Iran executed by hanging Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour, accused of involvement in an armed anti-government group, as the public prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dowlatabadi announced that death sentences have been issued against opposition activists involved in protests over June’s disputed presidential election. The new verdicts brings to nine, the number sentenced to death over the protests. The two were hanged at dawn on Thursday.

Over 100 dissidents were placed on trial after the disputed election in June 2009.

SOURCES:

Scotsman.com Two executed as Iran’s leaders step up post-election purge of opposition

TIMESONLINE Iran hangs alleged dissidents to warn opposition

One Response to “Iranian Opposition Activists Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour Executed in Iran”

  1. ENEMIES OF GOD. WHICH GOD?

    As predicted an inevitable outcome of evil with more to come.

    “Iran ‘executes two over post-election unrest’

    Iran has executed two men (Mohammad Reza Ali-Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour) arrested during the period of widespread unrest that erupted after June’s disputed presidential election, reports say.

    They had been convicted of being “enemies of God”, members of armed groups and trying to topple the Islamic establishment, Isna news agency said.” BBC Thursday, 28 January 2010

    “enemies of God”. Which God? The God who created Mohammad Reza Ali-Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour to protest against tyranny or the heinous God created by insane megalomaniac men only in the muslim poetry of death text.

    God has no enemies, never has, for what has a God to gain by creating enemies; it is man alone who creates enemies for mans own purpose not God. God is simply the usual non-existent ultimate authority from on high utilised to justify the despicable murder of many and obliterate the conscience of the perpetrators.

    Mohammad Reza Ali-Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour your contribution to life will always outweigh the heinous negative muslim religious idiocy which has led to your violent deaths.

    Oh One Day, Oh One Glorious Day for All Humanity, adherents of the muslim poetry of death text will realise the muslim poetry of death text was written by and for insane megalomaniac men, who believed erroneously they were messengers of God, trapped in a cultural context devoid of the notion of human rights, a text born of a murderous violence against dissent and cultural difference. ‘Death to…’ their vicious call to faith down through the ages. Any semblance of peace for infidels a short lull in a storm of terror and suppression.

    The goodness which may exist in the muslim poetry of death text is overwhelmed by its insidious call for grievous harm, subjugation to penalty, and denigration of non-adherents which starts from its very first page. In fact, pertinently it is the fate of non-adherents to the certainty of grievous harm which precedes any other subject within this muslim poetry of death text.

    In other words the framers of the muslim poetry of death text were so aware of the potential, one can only assume from experience, for rejection of their muslim poetry of death text they not only felt they needed to supply an incredibly ridiculous illogical reason why the muslim poetry of death text would be rejected, but also that such a rejection of the veracity of the muslim poetry of death text would necessarily result in grievous harm.

    One of the reasons why this would have been done is because the creators of this text knew with certainty their muslim poetry of death text, claimed to be sourced from God and/or Gods representative, would not necessarily convince by the power of its words alone, This is obviously impossible for if the text is derived from God and it is rejected means God is inept and/or Gods choice of transcribers is suspect. God is not inept. If a Gods text cannot convince by the power of its words alone then clearly it is created by man not by a God.

    This was written more as a warning for the already converted, as well more importantly the start of the building of the idea non-adherents were less and grievous harm necessarily their lot. Clearly such a denigration of humanity as we see repeated in history is the enabler of terror against fellow human beings. The fact the creators of the text evoke God, the ultimate authority, as the determiner of grievous harm against non-adherents provides the necessary abrogation of conscience as to an infidel’s fate when required.

    If there is one thing in this whole muslim poetry of death text which should prove to adherents with little reflection, beyond a shadow of a doubt God had nothing to do with the creation of this muslim poetry of death text is the notion that God is responsible for sealing a non-adherents hearing so whether or not a non-adherent was to be communicated the muslim poetry of death text they would not accept it.

    This proposes the following – God creates a human being seals this human from even hearing Gods own words, then God subjects this same human to grievous harm for not accepting Gods word. Such an obvious complete atrocious lunacy of reason, for it simply translates to – God is a complete megalomaniac git. However crazy and unsubstantiated, this reinforces the notion God (himself/herself) has condemned the infidel, what greater authority do you need to enable grievous harm with the appropriate absence of conscience.

    What has occurred from the very beginning and is occurring now in places like Iran, grievous harm needs to most publically and viciously visited upon non-adherents on earth. As clearly it was found, even before the muslim poetry of death text was compiled, non-adherents suffered no ill effects if allowed to go about their business unhindered.

    Such a state of affairs clearly undermined the veracity of the muslim poetry of death text for if an adherent was not better off on earth, more favoured by God for having to subject themselves to an onerous lifestyle derived from cultural antiquity what was the point. This is the real reason for the continuing terror and the direct cause of the violent deaths of Mohammad Reza Ali-Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour in Iran. The terror will continue until the muslim poetry of death text is either substantially revised or there are no longer any adherents. For even if every human was converted there would still be the requirement for terror and/or the real threat of terror to maintain adherence. For the muslim poetry of death text is clearly inherently flawed. Constant repetition, humans as they are, will not make it any easier to swallow for some.

    To say this muslim poetry of death text is not responsible for the terror visited upon humans down the ages by some muslims is to deny the terrible history to this day of violence perpetrated by avowed adherents of the muslim poetry of death text. A text upon which these muslim adherents claim is the reason and justification for their terror.

    If the muslim poetry of death text is not responsible – point to the text which framed and substantiates these insidious actions – societal actions are framed by ideas sourced from somewhere. To abrogate the responsibility of the muslim poetry of death text given it has been used down the ages to substantiate such actions without detailing the actual source is to deny reality and accept a continuance of terror.

    Muslims cannot expect society in general to remain benign regards their beliefs, practices and the veracity of the muslim poetry of death text where they clearly enable the justification of the terror and subjugation of adherents and non-adherents.

    The muslim poetry of death text urgently needs to be rewritten to take out the erroneous text, which enables the continuing terror against non-adherants and the subjugation of women to an unequal status to men.

    The muslim poetry of death text is certainly not the only text religious or otherwise requiring a makeover. The notion of Sovereignty as a legitimising agent for government action or non-action certainly requires revision. Though since 1138 there has been recognition in some quarters such actions as those detailed below belong to a barbaric past and should be left there.

    Richard, prior of the church of Hexham, England wrote an account of King Stephens’s devastation of humanity in Northumberland in 1138.

    “And then that execrable army, more atrocious than the whole race of pagans, neither fearing God nor regarding man, spread desolation over the whole province, and murdered everywhere persons of both sexes, of every age and rank, and overthrew, plundered, and burned towns, churches, and houses. For the sick on’ their couches, women pregnant and in childbed, infants in the womb, innocents at the breast, or on the mother’s knee, with the mothers themselves, decrepit old men and worn-out old women, and persons debilitated from whatever cause, wherever they met with them, they put to the edge of the sword, and transfixed with their spears; and by how much more horrible a death they could dispatch them, so much the more did they rejoice.”

Trackbacks/Pingbacks