Harry’s Place

Update on this dismal story:

At last, common sense has prevailed and Arash was released, without bail, from the detention centre this evening [Thursday], pending his appeal hearing for asylum.

http://azarmehr.blogspot.com/

You might want to link to this too

http://azarmehr.blogspot.com/2008/09/arash-is-released.html

It’s ‘empathy’, not ‘emapathy’.

Why do we always hear of genuine refugees and hard working immigrants being refused citizenship when convicted criminals, convicted terrorists and hate preachers have been granted citizenship without any questions asked? What the hell is going on at the Home Office?

Completely off topic but too good not to share with anyone who might have missed it.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4668250.ece

“Lauren Booth, Tony Blair’s sister-in-law, stuck in Gaza Strip”

spot on, Brett.

Arash was released from the detention centre, which is good news. But there are hundreds of genuine Iranian asylum seekers in the UK who are faced with the same problems, only they don’t have a high profile and don’t have people to campaign for them - some can barely speak English, so cannot articulate their problems to others. And that’s just the Iranian asylum seekers. African asylum seekers are regarded as the lowest of the low, bullied, harrassed, intimidated, subject to racist taunts by detention centre guards and denied essential medical treatment. Some who are able to access NHS services find themselves handcuffed to Group 8 guards even when they are going to the toilet - this includes women handcuffed to men - and doctors have complained that they are unable to have private discussions with the patient without the guards present. The treatment of asylum seekers in the UK is absymal and does not match the absurd claims made in the right-wing media. This is not just an issue relating to support for democracy, this is about the government’s complete disrespect for the human rights of highly vulnerable people.

In the context of the Iranian asylum seekers, the Iranian embassy has the resources to play the system to ensure that Ettela’at agents are planted in the UK as refugees in order to infiltrate opposition groups. These resources are not available to genuine asylum seekers. I also know that other governments are playing the system in the same way, particularly Uganda.

The Home Office also employs, unknowingly, translators who are associated with the Iranian regime and who gather information on activists fleeing persecution. Returned asylum seekers have claimed that they are arrested on arrival and interrogated by officials who have possession of their asylum applications. Thankfully, John Read ditched the understanding on consular affairs with the Iranian government which effectively formalised the process of handing over failed asylum seekers to the Iranian authorities - although the Home Office has repeatedly refused to publish this memorandum under the Freedom of Information Act, claiming it was against the public interest!

The asylum system is riddled with flaws, but the British government does not do anything about it because it does not give a damn about whether democracy activists are executed abroad.

New Labour has been particularly cruel as it seeks to appease a certain right-wing anti-refugee newspaper owned by a pornographer who donates substantial amounts of money to this corrupt government.

Melanie Phillips is good on this too.

“a robust and fair asylum system” - fair enough, and I know what you mean (I think) but it’s a pity you use the word “robust” when it has been so abused by New Labour; you hear it half a dozen times on a bad morning at the Today programme. It’s a word that is in danger of being drained of meaning in political discourse. This reached its nadir for me when Hazel Blears, in the New Statesman, described the appalling Labour campaign at the Crewe by-election - calling Timpson “a toff” etc - as “robust”. Grrrr.

What’s emapathy? Do you mean ‘empathy’, son?

This is not just an issue relating to support for democracy, this is about the government’s complete disrespect for the human rights of highly vulnerable people.

The same “highly vulnerable people” who travel though twenty safe and economically prosperous countries to get to the UK?

Highly vulnerable my arse, Dan.

As for Azarmehr, no doubt the Guardianistas that plague our public services and government bodies consider him a “neocon stooge” or something. People like him should be welcomed here and not the plagues of feckless spongers that are currently washing up on our shores.

“Do you mean ‘empathy’, son?”

Yes Poppa Benji.

“New Labour has been particularly cruel as it seeks to appease a certain right-wing anti-refugee newspaper owned by a pornographer who donates substantial amounts of money to this corrupt government.”

Which is strange, as you’d think he’d be in favour of more Asian babes in the country.

I meant to blog this - but Brett beat me to it.

I hate it when ‘blog’ is used as a verb. It’s not so great as a noun either, but there you go.

Actually, I just read that Desmond switched support to the Tories in 2004. But I still think the shoddy treatment of asylum seekers - which is well known to anyone who has ever had anything to do with the issue - is linked to a desire to appease the anti-refugee brigade. There is nothing in the system that ensures fairness and that discriminates between genuine and bogus cases. If an asylum seeker has access to half-decent legal representation (most legal representatives of asylum seekers are so bad that they fail to turn up to tribunals or get the details of the case wring), if they are well briefed on what to do and say and if they have support from people already in the UK, they are more likely to win - regardless of whether they have a genuine case (which Arash undoubtedly has). But the government wants to show a year-on-year decline in asylum seeker numbers and Home Office officials will do anything it takes to meet these political targets. It makes me so bloody angry the way these human beings are treated for the sake of this government’s party political objectives and is a reason why I cannot vote Labour.

Great comment by Dan at 11.51.

You know, its when you learn the sordid detail of how these folk are actually treated by the British state that you realise how hollow Blair and Miliband’s highfalutin rhetoric about democracy, internationalism and humanitarianism really is.

These politicos had to dragged kicking and screaming (thanks to some good work by HP and others) to some sort of half decent policy regarding Iraqi translators working for the British Army - then screwed around about it.

and is a reason why I cannot vote Labour

Yeah, damn right, it’s a reason I am averse to doing so too. Of course, the usual refrain is “the Tories will be worse” (what an inspiring argument!), but Labour now prides itself on shifting so far right on these particular issues one wonders if that is actually the case. Certainly, at any rate, it is a woefully inadequate argument.

‘Why do we always hear of genuine refugees and hard working immigrants being refused citizenship when convicted criminals, convicted terrorists and hate preachers have been granted citizenship without any questions asked? What the hell is going on at the Home Office?’

Because Labour has been running the country for so long that this is now normal practice. The Home Office considered Abu Hamza to be more worthy than this guy.

If you want asylum - preach hatred.

Anyone who is interested in the rights of asylum seekers and refugees in the UK would find this website very interesting: http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/

The Medical Justice Network is an alliance of doctors and lawyers as others who are appalled at denial of medical treatment for asylum seekers and refugees in the UK and their violent treatment by detention centre guards. It seems Arash did not have these problems, but they are all too common and are not addressed by the Home Office.

Whatever your views on all that Iran malarkey, blokes like Arash need our support.

Im sure he’s excited about your support, what are you planning to do? Send him a postcard from the orient?

Because Labour has been running the country for so long that this is now normal practice. The Home Office considered Abu Hamza to be more worthy than this guy.

Welcome to the wonderful world of the Human Rights Act. You were all warned that this vile despicable piece of legislation (almost certainly the most disgusting piece of shite passed through Parliment for 60 years) would fuck things up, but would y’all listen? Would you like fuck.

“the usual refrain is “the Tories will be worse” (what an inspiring argument!)”

In relation to the situation facing asylum seekers, Labour has been worse than the Tories largely due to its lack of interest in creating and funding a viable and fair asylum system coupled with a general rise in asylum seeker numbers (a global trend) and the sense of desperation arising from this - leading to deportation targets and arbitrary, inflexible judgements. The Tories had to deal with far lower numbers of asylum seekers, which meant they could absorb them without a political storm. I don’t know if it would get worse under the Tories, but I’m certain the situation will not get better under Labour because the current regime refuses to listen to those who know better. It’s an attitude they have adopted across a whole range of policy areas: the asylum system is just another victim of the inertia and desperation that has gripped the Labour party.

Labour is doomed and deserves to be doomed. Instead, advocates of asylum seekers should plough some of their resources into shaping the agenda of the forthcoming Conservative government, which is an inevitability. Hopefully, they will institute a system that is fair and not governed by targets and public relations.

My modest proposal re asylum is that there should be an EU agreement that countries that create asylum seekers and where human rights abuses are proven in a EU member country court (or a special EU wide court) should have sanctions taken against them on an ascending scale, unless they take steps to improve their human rights records.

This could start from sanctions against politicians travelling and progress to economic sanctions. Also action could be taken at the UN to remove the country from committees etc.

One advantage of this approach would be the massive negative worldwide publicity that would arise re these countries.

Of course there are lots of issues here ie what about asylum seekers from China, do we have sanctions against them ? But on the other hand an important line in the sand re Western principles on human rights would be drawn.

Im sure he’s excited about your support, what are you planning to do? Send him a postcard from the orient?

I’ve fired off an email to the UK Border Agency. I suggest that other folk do the same.

“My modest proposal”

The most common cause of population displacement and refugees is war, notably civil war - DR Congo, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, etc. Who would you impose sanctions on in Central Africa? Which group is the aggressor? Your proposal does not reflect political realities.

Welcome to the wonderful world of the Human Rights Act. You were all warned that this vile despicable piece of legislation (almost certainly the most disgusting piece of shite passed through Parliment for 60 years) would fuck things up, but would y’all listen? Would you like fuck.

On the contrary, I would say it’s one of the best and most liberal pieces of legislation Labour has passed. What’s your problem with the HRA?

Dan - see page 14 in this : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/18_03_08_unasylum.pdf

The biggest numbers of asylum seekers in 2007 to the West come from :

Iraq 22,908 45,247 68,155 98% 8 .2 1 4.7 1 1
China 18,400 17,141 35,541 -7% 6 .6 5 .6 2 3
Russian Federation 15,734 18,781 34,515 19% 5 .6 6 .1 4 2
Serbia* 15,744 15,366 31,110 -2% 5 .6 5 .0 3 4
Pakistan 7,620 14,262 21,882 87% 2 .7 4 .6 9 5
Somalia 8,007 11,487 19,494 43% 2 .9 3 .7 8 6
Islamic Rep. of Iran 10,649 8,627 19,276 -19% 3 .8 2 .8 5 9
Afghanistan 8,657 9,309 17,966 8% 3 .1 3 .0 7 8
Mexico 6,760 9,545 16,305 41% 2 .4 3 .1 11 7
Turkey 8,702 6,814 15,516 -22% 3 .1 2 .2 6 12
Haiti 7,041 6,619 13,660 -6% 2 .5 2 .2 10 14

Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan are the “at war” countries here.

Note Russia, Serbia and Mexico (!?) - very high figures. Also Turkey - I presume these are being taken into account in EU membership negotiatons !

Also, I don’t think the British government would be willing to sacrifice business for the sake of asylum seekers. It was not prepared to do so in the BAe arms scandal.

What’s your problem with the HRA?

Do you have three days spare?

“The Home Office considered Abu Hamza to be more worthy than this guy.

If you want asylum - preach hatred.”

This, of course, makes sense in the context of moral cowardice. You give things to people you fear. You take things from people you do not fear.

Labor, moral cowardice? Could it be the same thing? Signs point to yes.

Dan - the country would only be sanctioned if the abuse to the asylum seeker was due to the state and its agents or a criminal lack of care.

I know business wouldn’t like it but by starting the sanctions against the political leadership you mitigate that a bit perhaps.

BTW I have a comment from >10 mins ago still not up - how long is this anti-spam checking supposed to take ?

Dan,

From your link (Medical Justice Network):

Practical Notes on Hunger Strikes by Dr Frank Arnold

a) It is not the job of a doctor to tell you to continue or stop your protest. It is their job to explain, in ways you will understand, the consequences of your decisions.

What the fuck??

Since when is it NOT the duty of a doctor to discourage a patient from engaging in activities harmful to their health?

It is their job to explain, in ways you will understand, the consequences of your decisions.

“Since when is it NOT the duty of a doctor to discourage a patient from engaging in activities harmful to their health?”

I would think that explaining the consequences is discouragement enough. It is ultimately up to the patient to determine what they will do with the Doctor’s advice.

“Since when is it NOT the duty of a doctor to discourage a patient from engaging in activities harmful to their health?”

A hunger strike may be of less risk to a person’s health than being sent back to the country where they were tortured and where they could face the death penalty for their beliefs.

Both the UK and the US are making it harder to seek asylum and Iranians face a particularly difficult time.

I have worked on asylum issues and, with respect, it is not all that straight forward. Whilst Azamehr may have a genuine case under the 1951 convention the sad reality is that many immigration lawyers here and the UK are assisting bogus claims by coaching Iranian economic refugees to make claims based on a human rights case.

I have witnessed multiple examples of this conduct and witnessed lawyers trying to obtain documents from human rights organisations that effectively falsify their client’s claims. It is not a popular issue - but the hard reality is that there is large scale abuse of the asylum system - and the ultimate losers in this are those with genuine asylum claims.

Maybe Suffolk, but that does not excuse the general treatment of asylum seekers and recent immigrants in the UK, linked to the general reactionary climate about these issues.

Moreover, I have to say, economic migrants are a phenomenon resulting from global economic disparity, a situation that has not been eased.

How is Suffolk these days? I have not been near those parts since I went sailing on the Broads a while back.

I would think that explaining the consequences is discouragement enough. It is ultimately up to the patient to determine what they will do with the Doctor’s advice.

Perhaps. But why shouldn’t a doctor go a step further and say to a hunger striker ‘Look, you need to stop this.’?

“Whilst Azamehr may have a genuine case under the 1951 convention …”

Just for the record, Potkin Azarmehr has been living in the UK legitimately for over 25 years (he may have British citizenship now). I think you are referring to Arash.

I respect your efforts Benji, but the government wont give a crap. There aren’t any good headlines in helping Iranian refugees you see.

Some asylum seekers are genuinely seeking asylum, but their cases are dismissed because they don’t strictly fall into the criteria of refugee. This is often the case with homosexual asylum seekers, with the Home Office refusing to acknowledge that homosexuality is punished by death in places like Iran (either judicially or extra-judicially) - the FCO tends to take a very different stance, with two wings of government contradicting each other to advance their own departmental interests.

A hunger strike may be of less risk to a person’s health than being sent back to the country where they were tortured and where they could face the death penalty for their beliefs.

Yes, but it doesn’t make sense to me that a doctor wouldn’t actively discourage harmful behavior.

I sympathise with anyone who’s fled Iran’s hardline régime, and would not hesitate to help them out.

However, immigration is a very big and very profitable black-market type operation.

Immigration and asylum advocates are unwitting partners of criminal organisations that traffic in human beings and that treat their ‘clients’ with the utmost indifference.

I read an article several months ago, for instance, that claimed there were more than a million sub-saharan Africans camped in Libya with the ultimate aim of making it to the UK.

And as for the asylum systeme itself, if a dictatorial régime is criteria enough to be granted asylum, then we’ll ultimately have to grant it to 100s of millions, won’t we?

And doesn’t giving asylum to some individuals simply generate more asylum seekers?

And doesn’t the practice also reinforce dictatorial régimes all across the globe by ridding those régimes of troublesome and potential subversive elements?

Does the ‘good’ we do have the perverse and unintended effect of prolonging the misery and oppression of 100s of millions of third-worlders?

Has The West simply become the over-flow valve for dictators?

John P - you’re right - which is exactly why we should be punishing these regimes by sanctions.

all cannot receive sanctuary…instead of remaining in limbo, why not stand together to face the oppressors one is running from…the U.S. didn’t become a sanctuary by the luck of the draw but by uniting against atrosities and refusing to run from them

which is exactly why we should be punishing these regimes by sanctions.

Sod that. We should be punishing these regimes by having a competition to see how many fascist dictators we can mount on yardarms.

“BTW I have a comment from >10 mins ago still not up - how long is this anti-spam checking supposed to take ?”

It’s all automated, so unless someone’s attention is drawn to it, it could stay there forever.

I’ll go and check now.

“if a dictatorial régime is criteria enough to be granted asylum”

It isn’t the criteria. See: http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/asylum/

“doesn’t the practice also reinforce dictatorial régimes all across the globe by ridding those régimes of troublesome and potential subversive elements?”

Troublesome people are often incarcerated or executed. The ability to escape these punishments by fleeing abroad arguably emboldens individuals to take greater risks in defying a dictatorial regime. Additionally, most people facing persecution do not want to leave.

“Has The West simply become the over-flow valve for dictators?”

The biggest refugee overflows are places like Tanzania, which had an influx of one million refugees from the Congolese civil war, yet its population is only around 38 million. It would be the equivalent of the half the population of Ireland relocating to the UK. It is the developing world that suffers the brunt of population displacement caused by war, not the developed world - we accept only a tiny proportion.

The ability to escape these punishments by fleeing abroad arguably emboldens individuals to take greater risks in defying a dictatorial regime.

I fail to see how settling in the UK endangers and destabilisies dictatorships 1000s of miles away.

Régime change HAS to come from within and can only happen when the discomfort level of subversives becomes too intense, and so the more we accept dissidents, the more secure the dictatorial régimes from which they’ve fled become.

How can a régime be overturned if all those who wishing to overturn it are comfortably ensconced in The West?

Additionally, The west’s willingness to open its doors to so many suffering under repressive régimes has given rise to a whole industry of human ‘commerce’, one in which mafisos make millions, and one in which thousands die of hunger, thirst, drowning at sea etc, etc.

I really don’t see any nobility in this.

Montréal has a large and somewhat bourgeois Haitian community, many of whom fled Haiti’s dictators back in the 70s.

There are now more Haitian doctors serving Montréal’s 100,000 strong Haitian community ( and other Montréalers) than there is in ALL of Haiti…a nation of 8 million.

And I’m in good health, thank-you.

Dan - my comment that was held up above shows that the largest producers of asylum seekers are NOT states at war :

“The biggest numbers of asylum seekers in 2007 to the West come from :

Iraq 22,908 45,247 68,155 98% 8 .2 1 4.7 1 1
China 18,400 17,141 35,541 -7% 6 .6 5 .6 2 3
Russian Federation 15,734 18,781 34,515 19% 5 .6 6 .1 4 2
Serbia* 15,744 15,366 31,110 -2% 5 .6 5 .0 3 4
Pakistan 7,620 14,262 21,882 87% 2 .7 4 .6 9 5
Somalia 8,007 11,487 19,494 43% 2 .9 3 .7 8 6
Islamic Rep. of Iran 10,649 8,627 19,276 -19% 3 .8 2 .8 5 9
Afghanistan 8,657 9,309 17,966 8% 3 .1 3 .0 7 8
Mexico 6,760 9,545 16,305 41% 2 .4 3 .1 11 7
Turkey 8,702 6,814 15,516 -22% 3 .1 2 .2 6 12
Haiti 7,041 6,619 13,660 -6% 2 .5 2 .2 10 14

Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan are the “at war” countries here.

Note Russia, Serbia and Mexico (!?) - very high figures. Also Turkey - I presume these are being taken into account in EU membership negotiatons !”

“Régime change HAS to come from within and can only happen when the discomfort level of subversives becomes too intense, and so the more we accept dissidents, the more secure the dictatorial régimes from which they’ve fled become.”

Do you think the cause of democracy in Iran would have been best served by deporting Arash and abandoning him to his fate, which would have been on the end of a rope attached to a crane in a market square in Tehran, with hundreds of Bassiji fanatics jeering at him?

“The west’s willingness to open its doors to so many suffering under repressive régimes has given rise to a whole industry of human ‘commerce’, one in which mafisos make millions, and one in which thousands die of hunger, thirst, drowning at sea etc, etc.”

No, it’s the difficulties involved in claiming asylum that give rise to criminal elements taking money to move refugees from the Middle East to Europe. It is generally not possible to fly to Britain without a visa and claim asylum, because airlines will not take you without a visa, the authorities of the country you are fleeing won’t let you leave (if they haven’t already siezed your passport) and you risk immediate deportation as an illegal immigrant when you disembark. If it were not for Kurdish, Turkish and Albanian traffickers taking money to smuggle people into Europe, a lot of genuine Iranian refugees currently in the UK would no longer be alive.

“The biggest numbers of asylum seekers in 2007 to the West come from”

I was talking about people who have been displaced by war globally. The majority flee to the neighbouring country. In the case of the war in the Congo, one of the worst humanitarian disasters in recent history, countries such as Tanzania and Zambia took the full brunt, but only a few of these refugees (including relatively affluent, Western educated people) went to the West.

“the vast majority of refugees are hosted by neighbouring countries with over 80 per cent remaining within their region of origin …

“As of the end of 2007, roughly one third of all refugees were residing in countries in the Asia and Pacific region, with 80 per cent of them being Afghans. The Middle East and North Africa region was host to a
quarter of all refugees, primarily from Iraq, while Africa and Europe hosted respectively 20 and 14 per cent of the world’s refugees. The Americas region had the smallest share of refugees (9%), with Colombians constituting the largest number.”

Major refugee hosting countries,
end-2007
Pakistan 2,033,100
Syrian Arab Rep. 1,503,800
Islamic Rep. of Iran 963,500
Germany 578,900
Jordan 500,300
United Rep. of Tanzania 435,600
China 301,100
United Kingdom 299,700
Chad 294,000
United States 281,200

http://www.unhcr.org/statistics/STATISTICS/4852366f2.pdf

No, it’s the difficulties involved in claiming asylum that give rise to criminal elements taking money to move refugees from the Middle East to Europe.

By “difficulties” do you mean having national borders and maintaining control over those national borders?

Mexico’s border with the U.S. is as porous as any border gets, it presents few “diffculties”, and yet Mexican mafiosos make millions every year funnelling in illegals, some of whom die horrible deaths while en route.

To boot, America regularises millions of these immigrants about every ten years, and so if severe border patrols and immigration controles “stimulated” the growth of traffickers, then why hasn’t the number of Mexicans trafficking human beings for profit declined?

What I can’t understand about those supporting mass immigration is why they don’t see how they inadvertenly support, stimulate and reinforce criminal elements that prey on vulnerable people.

Do you think the cause of democracy in Iran would have been best served by deporting Arash and abandoning him to his fate, which would have been on the end of a rope attached to a crane in a market square in Tehran, with hundreds of Bassiji fanatics jeering at him?

I don’t know all the details of the Arash case and so can’t say.

However, it would seem reasonable that if all Iranian dissidents left Iran and were given asylum in the UK, the Mullahs would have a green light to abuse the Iranian people like never before.

There has to be a minimum number of dissidents ‘on-the-ground’, organising resistance and agitating for change, if these jokers are ever going to be turfed out of power.

Text-messaging Tehran from a comfortable London flat won’t do.

If it were not for Kurdish, Turkish and Albanian traffickers taking money to smuggle people into Europe, a lot of genuine Iranian refugees currently in the UK would no longer be alive.

Yes, Albanian, Kurdish and Turkish mafiosos are champions of the poor, the tired and the hungry!

We’re talking about naked, money-grubboing exploitation here, an exploitation that often kills those being exploited.

These thugs, despite your glowing descriptions, aren’t noble and aren’t running some kind of Harriet Tubman-style underground railway here; on the contrary, they are exploiting the gullible and the vulnerable, some of whom end up dead.

And it’s not as though they only get paid once you’ve reached your destination.

No, they’re paid up-front, and once they have their money, they don’t give a damn what happens to those they’re smuggling.

“We’re talking about naked, money-grubboing exploitation here, an exploitation that often kills those being exploited.”

Sure, but that’s what the current system creates. I have no illusions about those involved in people smuggling, although there are some people smugglers who act out of principle and solidarity. Anyway, parties that are driven underground have to rely on underground networks. What do you expect?

“Mexico’s border with the U.S. is as porous as any border gets, it presents few “diffculties”, and yet Mexican mafiosos make millions every year funnelling in illegals, some of whom die horrible deaths while en route.”

Political asylum and economic migration are two separate issues.

“There has to be a minimum number of dissidents ‘on-the-ground’, organising resistance and agitating for change, if these jokers are ever going to be turfed out of power.”

It’s as simple as that, is it? Please, go speak to an Iranian some time.

Iran isn’t some kind of backwoods hellhole like Cambodia was during Pol Pot, Dan. We’re taking about a first world country here. They HAVE the means for change if they’re willing. If the vast majority of them didn’t get some kind of perverse pleasure out of hanging queers then it wouldn’t be happening!

Morgoth is right. Why not forcibly make their homelands more accommodating to their own fucking citizens?

“Iran isn’t some kind of backwoods hellhole like Cambodia was during Pol Pot, Dan.”

Why should you measure Iran against Cambodia? It is something of a hellhole for many Iranians.

“We’re taking about a first world country here.”

Really?! Iran certainly has the potential to be a first world country, but it is being held back by a violent, self-serving clique, which can call out a paramilitary force of one million - the Bassij - that has been set up to repress civilian uprisings.

“They HAVE the means for change if they’re willing. If the vast majority of them didn’t get some kind of perverse pleasure out of hanging queers then it wouldn’t be happening!”

Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. There are thousands of Iranians protesting against this regime every week, putting their lives at risk in order to challenge the authorities. You may not have taken an interest in it.

Iran has hosted many civilisations and not so long ago was considerably more civilised than Europe, when we were bashing each other about the head with sticks in the name of kings and the papacy. Few Iranians get pleasure out of seeing hangings. On the contrary, they find it rather sick to see men hung from cranes in market squares.

Dan - agreed Iran a dictatorial repressive s***hole. What should we do ?

We’ve tried almost all types of sanctions. How about blowing up their oil refineries. That might concentrate the minds of the theocratic leadership scum.

Any other alternatives ?

(Having said that I’m hoping the rapidly falling oil price might well be about to deliver a timely blow to a variety of oiligarchic scumbag nations such as Iran. Viva la oil price slump Senor Chavez and Mr Putin.)

MMN: The collapse of the current regime, or a very radical reform (more far-reaching than Khatami’s “reforms”), is an inevitability. The structure of the Iranian economy cannot survive. For instance, the constitutional prohibition on foreign ownership of strategic resources forbids production-sharing contracts, which makes long-term investment in oilfields unattractive. Iran’s recoverable reserves are declining because of a lack of foreign capital and expertise, yet these are the regime’s lifeblood. There will come a time when it will be unable to pay its way through trouble; it is already finding it hard to subsidise fuel and when it raises prices there are riots. There are also serious tensions emerging between the industrial class and the religious class, with the former believing the latter is undermining business opportunities by putting religious and political interests before profit (ie stopping imports of car parts from Korea in retaliation for Korea’s vote to refer Iran to the UNSC for its nuclear programme, which led to a halt in production of Kia models in Iran).

What can we do? Offer solidarity and ensure that human rights are at the top of the diplomatic agenda in order to keep a small part of Iranian civil society alive.

It is concievable that the Tories will be better then Labour when it comes to granting asylum to those seeking it because they do not tremble in their boots at the thought of being attacked by the Daily Mail.
The old Vulcan proverb that “only Nixon can go to China” might apply in this case as well.

Why should you measure Iran against Cambodia? It is something of a hellhole for many Iranians.

Because we’re talking about a country of modern, educated people as opposed to a country of mostly illiterate, easily influenced farmers.

Really?! Iran certainly has the potential to be a first world country, but it is being held back by a violent, self-serving clique, which can call out a paramilitary force of one million - the Bassij - that has been set up to repress civilian uprisings.

They ARE a first world country, Dan. I won’t go down the list but they have all the fancy shit you and I have. And don’t give me any crap about the “force of one million - the Bassij”. Most Iranians AGREE with those assholes or they would be quickly dispatched.

Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. There are thousands of Iranians protesting against this regime every week, putting their lives at risk in order to challenge the authorities. You may not have taken an interest in it.

Thousands? How impressive. No, the problem is that millions AGREE with those Islamist assholes. So NOW where are we?

Few Iranians get pleasure out of seeing hangings. On the contrary, they find it rather sick to see men hung from cranes in market squares.

Bull. Fucking. Shit.

If they’re so horrified by it then why do they flock to the town square to witness it?

“They ARE a first world country, Dan. I won’t go down the list but they have all the fancy shit you and I have. And don’t give me any crap about the “force of one million - the Bassij”. Most Iranians AGREE with those assholes or they would be quickly dispatched.”

When was the last free and fair election that elected the Supreme Leader?

“Thousands? How impressive. No, the problem is that millions AGREE with those Islamist assholes. So NOW where are we?”

You are a lunatic. You have no idea of what happens to those who stand up against this regime, do you? Most Iranian asylum cases I’ve dealt with have involved men who have been tortured, including having their testicles repeatedly stamped on until they explode and being anally raped with truncheons. Women, including pregnant women, and children, as young as two, are often held as hostages in order to force dissidents to sign false confessions. Do you realise what risks these brave people are taking? They are putting their entire families at risk of torture and destitution. Would you make this sacrifice for your political beliefs. I don’t think I could.

“If they’re so horrified by it then why do they flock to the town square to witness it?”

They don’t. The Bassij are employed to jeer at hangings, but most don’t.

“They ARE a first world country, Dan. I won’t go down the list but they have all the fancy shit you and I have.”

Could you give me an example of how many tractors, mobile telephones and computers a farmer in Yazd, Khuzestan or Balochistan owns? Outside the urban centres, Iran is as poor as most African states.

When Iran is free, I would love to tour this beautiful, diverse and interesting country. There is nowhere in the world I’d love to visit more than Iran. Unfortunately, the regime has declared that I am persona non grata due to my own work with Iranian human rights organisations. But I am confident I will one day step on Iranian soil and I will work with any Iranian to achieve freedom so that this country can open up to the world and become the open and tolerant country it once was, before Khomeini and before the Pahlavis.

Boogski is a vaccum, thus the ‘hilarious’ commie comments and such and nowt much else. A vaccum will suck you dry (ha ha?) and leave merely a deflated remains. Please don’t engage with the abyss.