Gutless Barbados “Abstains” From UN Vote Citing Iran For Human Rights Abuses, Torture, Discrimination and Violence Against Women – AND THEN VOTES TO PROTECT IRAN!

iran-hangs-teenage-girl-barbados-un-vote2.jpg iran-hangs-teenage-girl-barbados-un-vote1.jpg

Photo: 16 Year Old Iranian Girl Hanged For Having Sex Outside Marriage – Male Co-Defendant Given Lashes, Released.

Barbados Says “No Problem Here”

From Payvand’s Iran News…

The United Nations General Assembly has voted to express “serious concern” about a long list of human rights abuses in Iran and to call on Iranian authorities to ensure full respect for such rights. The resolution was adopted on December 19, 2006 by a vote of 72-50, with 55 abstentions, in the 192-country assembly. Before the vote, Iranian diplomats unsuccessfully tried to block the resolution.

The resolution faults Iranian authorities for “harassment, intimidation, and persecution” of human rights advocates, political opponents, religious dissenters, journalists, parliamentarians, students, academics, Internet bloggers, and labor union members.

It criticizes Iran’s justice system, which it says has “persistently failed” to meet international standards, and expresses concern over the use of torture and cruel or degrading punishment such as flogging and amputations.

It also decries violence and discrimination against women and girls in Iran, and discrimination and human rights violations against ethnic and religious minorities.

… read the entire article (link here).

Must Be OK by Barbados: Torture, Floggings, Amputations, Discrimination & Violence Against Iranian Women

Take a look at the above photo of 16 year-old Ateqeh Rajabi being publicly hanged in the city centre of Neka, Iran on August 15, 2004 for the “crime” of having sex with a man she was not married to. The man was lashed and then released – after all, he’s a man so therefore it must have been the girl’s fault for “tempting” him.

Our gutless Barbados government and their diplomats at the United Nations obviously have no problem with this or the long list of standard human rights violations by the animals who run Iran. Barbados abstained from voting to cite Iran for torture, floggings, amputations as punishment, discrimination and violence against women – and executions of children like Ateqeh Rajabi.

THEN… after the vote against Iranian Human Rights Violations passed…

Barbados Voted To Protect Iran From Sanctions Over Human Rights!

After the UN Motion citing Iran for Human Rights Violations passed, the question “Now what should the UN do?” had to be pondered. This time, Barbados got right into the fray and voted that “no action” be taken against Iran.

Here is the record from the United Nations website (link here)…

Vote on Human Rights in Iran

The no-action motion concerning draft resolution IV on the situation of human rights in Iran (document A/61/443/ADD.3) was not adopted by a recorded vote of 81 against to 75 in favour, with 24 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Bhutan, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, China, Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, India, Indonesia, Iran, …

Story Links

Payvand’s Iran News – UN General Assembly Cites Iran For Human Rights Abuses

United Nations General Assembly – Dec 19, 2006 Media Release – Human Rights Issues

(Do a “find” for Barbados and you will see the two motions regarding Iran – Barbados abstained on the censure motion, then backed Iran on the motion to take “no action” against Iran for Human Rights violations)

BBC – Execution Of A Teenage Girl

BBC – Iranian Adulteress Stoned To Death

Iran Press Service *** WARNING – GRAPHIC *** Execution Of 16 Years Old Girl Outrages Public Opinion

Human Rights Watch – Iran Human Rights Violations

Human Rights Watch – Iran Hangs Two Men For Homosexual Conduct

Women And The Death Penalty In Modern Iran

Advertisements

44 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Politics & Corruption, Religion

44 responses to “Gutless Barbados “Abstains” From UN Vote Citing Iran For Human Rights Abuses, Torture, Discrimination and Violence Against Women – AND THEN VOTES TO PROTECT IRAN!

  1. John

    I try to avoid the religion discourse but recently came across these words spoken more than a hundred years ago.

    Winston Churchill on Islam:

    How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

    A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

    Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.

    No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

    — Sir Winston Spencer Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

  2. akabozik

    What could Barbados have been thinking to vote like this? What is the message? Is anyone in control of our UN delegation?

    Dr. Duguid, can you tell us what this is all about. It really looks bad.

  3. West Side Davie

    I agree with akabozik. If Barbados abstained on the first motion because we just wanted to stay out of it, why back Iran so strongly on the motion to protect them?

    As to the treatment of women, stoning, cutting off hands and stuff, that barbaric behaviour is all normal and dictated under Islamic law.

    We should either stay out of it entirely or be concerned about human rights worldwide. To actually back Iran and protect them from the international consequences of this animalistic behaviour is unfathomable to me.

    What was the government of Barbados thinking?

  4. Huh?

    I’m confused.. I would hate to think that the government reads these resolutions and still votes the way it does.

  5. Phoenix

    I wonder if they decided to make these decisions in order to stay on the “good side” of a potentialy dangerous region. After all we have a major international event coming here in a few months, we wouldnt want to draw any unwanted attention now would we.

    As for my personal opinion, whoever did this voting was being a coward, and it insults barbadians everywhere. If you stand for nothing, you fall for everything.

  6. Environmentalist

    We need some explanation from The Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I agree with 2 earlier comments if we abstained on the first resolution then why vote with Iran on the second. Abstain again but why support Iran in the second? Dr. Duguid can you get our Minister of Foreign Affairs to expalin?

  7. Pat

    I see nothing wrong with the way Barbados voted. It is right NOT to interfere in the internal running of Iran or any other Islamic country. They do not interfere in ours. Throughout the long history of Iran, they have never, never, invaded or try to influence another soverign state. Sharia law is their law, in the same way that Judaism has its own religious laws pertaining to marriage, child rearing and divorce to name a few. It is their law, we do not have to like it, neither should we try to change it. In Judaism, no matter how badly a husband treats his wife, even if he maims her, she cannot get a divorce unless the huband gives her something called a “git”. Without that, she cannot even file for a divorce in a civil court.

    International affairs and politics are slippery slopes. I would not try to second guess the government. Don’t abuse the representative to the UN. He/she gets their instructions from the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

  8. Hants

    Prehaps Barbados is choosing to vote with China and India.

  9. Eager Reader

    Does Word Press have a copy of the original resolution? We would also need to see the resolution that was finally adopted before we can conclude that it is simply a case of not wanting to condemn Iran. I understand that sometimes countries present resolutions to divert attention from matters in their own countries. It would be helpful to know Which country proposed the resolution in the first place.

  10. passin thru

    Pat says “Throughout the long history of Iran, they have never, never, invaded or try to influence another soverign state.”

    Huh? What garbage is that? Iran is the world’s premier exporter of Jihad. It’s president has said that Sharia will topple the west.

    Do a little research before you put your mouth in gear, Pat.

  11. passin thru

    I love how Pat tried to equate the way Iran and Sharia treats women with the way Jews treat women. Who brought Jews into this except Pat?

    Show me a photo of Jews hanging a 16 year old girl, stoning a woman for adultery or chopping off the hand of a thief, Pat. Show me Jewish women who need a note to go out of the house. Show me Jewish women who can’t drive, vote, go to school or see a doctor when they like.

    Idiot.

  12. West Side Davie

    Hey passin thru

    I’m surprised you didn’t pick up on Pat saying “I would not try to second guess the government… ”

    Ha ha ha!

    U R Right…. Pat is an idiot. 😉

  13. Red Lake Lassie

    Phoenix is right on the money. This vote insulted Barbadians everywhere.

    These votes at the United Nations don’t mean anything when it comes to action or doing something, but the symbolism is very real and important.

    Barbados chose the side of evil.

  14. Kathy

    I think Barbados voted with Cuba. I suppose Pat would not have wanted to interfere with Hitler either.

  15. Get In The Action

    I think Hants hit it bang on. Our government is blindly voting with China. Heh they have to get something back for all the soft loans they’ve given us. Everyone at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who made this decision should be forced to read Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi’s Iran Awakening. It maps the struggle of this exceptionally brave lawyer as she defends the rights of women and children against the hard line clerics. This, in a judicial system where officially the value of a woman’s life is placed at half that of man. By voting the way they have, the Government has insulted every Barbadian woman. And look at the exceptional list we have sided with – Belarus, Cuba, Algeria, Azerbaijan…. Bastions of respect for human rights.

  16. akabozik

    Maybe the headline should be “China Now Runs Barbados Foreign Policy”

  17. Rumplestilskin

    At first glance, I fully agree that human rights abuses and freedoms should not be infringed by any state and thus Barbados’s vote seems unusual.

    However, bear in mind that there ‘is more to the mortar than the pestle’.

    Right now there is tremendous pressure being put on Iran re the Nuclear potential of the nation and the possibility of nuclear proliferation.

    Does this named resolution have more to do with the general pressure being currently applided or directly with the Human rights abuses per se?

    If the latter, then it appears we are treading fine waters. However, if the first then Barbados vote may be rationalised very easily.

    At the same time as the West, specifically Tony Blair, is saying that Iran should not be allowed to developed nuclear capabilities, he has stated categorically in the context of a new nuclear submarine, that Great Britain will not relinquish its right to nuclear weapons.

    Is that not unusual in the contaxt of a world wide anti-nuclear proliferation agreement.

    Indeed, does that not ring of hypocrisy and slur that the West are thinking, civilised persons who will not stoop to using their weapons needlessly but the rest of us are not? Are we underdeveloped villagers?

    Not only is this approach patronising but highly insulting to the East, and the rest of us who may be regarded as non-developed.

    If nuclear weapons are so threatening (which I agree they are), then why is the West persisting on its own programme? USA has something like 16,000 warheads.

    May be their concern refers to the Iran leaders threats re Israel. Fair enough, but note that any warheads released against Israel will both meet an immediate retaliation from Israel and even if not, result in fallout affecting Iran itself. So with that in mind, why would Iran even think of using nuclear weapons against Israel? Unless the whole nation of IRAN iskeen on getting to the promised 72 virgins that much faster?

    In terms of human rights, what is the UN doing about Darfur. About the slums in South America, where the poor live in real shanty villages while the wealthy live high on the hog?

    Are food, clothing, education and dignity not also human rights? Or are these conditions acceptable if the victims are working in factories to supply goods to the developed Nations.

    You can stone a man to death, but you can also starve him.

    International diplomacy is complicated, riddled with hypocrisy, side deals and self service.

    Human rights abuses are abhorrent but that’s true. However, in many cases these votes are only brought about when the named Nation itself offends the West.

    Where is the level playing field?

    Thus, while I understand your reactions, I cannot cirticise the Barbados vote unless I know the full circumstances in which given.

  18. akabozik

    Rumplestilskin say “Thus, while I understand your reactions, I cannot cirticise the Barbados vote unless I know the full circumstances in which given.”

    How are we to know what the government is thinking because none of the newspapers covered this and the government is saying nothing.

    Go to the link and you will see that many resolutions were passed against many countries all to do with human rights. this was not about iran and nukes, it was about human rights everywhere.

    You did not go to the UN link to look at the whole things before you wrote your big long piece Rumplestilskin. You should visit the links that are in the BFP article before you write.

    For me I am convinced that Barbados did something reprehensible here.

    I would demand that the goverment account for their decision but we know they account for nothing to nobody.

  19. akabozik

    Here is the link from the bfp story Rumplestilskin

    http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2006/ga10562.doc.htm

    United Nations General Assembly – Dec 19, 2006 Media Release – Human Rights Issues

    See? It is all about human rights everywhere. How can you look at that photo and some of the other photos in the links and still support Iran?

    How can Barbados government justify this vote before their fellow Barbados citizens? I am ashamed that we voted this way. Ashamed.

  20. Jason

    I am so happy we voted with such freedom-loving countries as North Korea, China, Egypt, Congo, Botswana, Angola, Afghanistan etc etc etc

    Pardon me if I misquote a bible verse “Where your vote is, that is where your heart is”

  21. Get In The Action

    Rumplestilskin there are no shades of grey here. By not standing up and shouting a loud NO, Barbados has given a thumbs up to the Iranian theocracy. It’s OK to go ahead and execute poets, journalists, lawyers, university students and everyone with an opposing view in Iran. It’s OK to execute women for “moral crimes” under Sharia Law. This is not about bombs. It’s about stopping the carnage and shaming Iran into moderating its laws.

  22. Rumplestilskin

    Akabozik,

    I admit not reading the link. Point taken. I however maintain that there are sometimes actions behind the scenes to impact both te bringing of and the voting on these issues.

    Please also refer to votes on other areas of the linked document, for example the USA vote on a motion to address racism. Unusual that USA was the ONLY vote against the motion.

    Now THAT is also news, and rather alarming at that.

  23. BFP

    Good Sunday Morning everyone, and Merry Christmas!

    It is good to see some intelligent debate going on by people of good intentions (our readers, of course!).

    Now that I have re-read our article and some of the comments, I am saddened and angry that the ONLY public debate taking place on Barbados’ foreign policy seems to be right here.

    Where is the “professional” Barbados media? Where are the politicians of good heart from both sides of the floor?

    No debate and a government that doesn’t care to explain its actions to its own citizens is a dangerous state of affairs for our country.

    That’s all I wanted to say before I turn in for a few hours (just got home from working all night).

    Merry Christmas!

    Marcus

  24. Ronin of the Void

    Pat has proven himself to be a Jihad apologist over and over again in this blog. Idiot is way too kind of a description. A monumental ‘git’ in the British sense of the word is more appropriate. As for the ‘professional’ media covering this? You are it BFP! We are becoming China’s lapdog, so guard your identities ever closer boys, we know what China does to dissenting journalists. Pat’s point that our U.N. Diplomats get their directives from the Minister of Foreign Affairs is actually spot on. These are the same geniuses that decided to gouge our Antipodean friends with visa fees on World Cup eve. You know what to do people.

  25. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to learn that some poor soul in the Barbados delegation pushed the wrong button. Got mixed up over “those in favour of taking no action” when his/her instructions were “those in favour of taking action.” I am sure such slip-ups happen, and most of the time nobody notices. So let’s not bust a gut on this joyous holday, just in case.

  26. God Bless David

    Looks like most of CARICOM voted as a block (apart from those territories marked “absent”)….really does make you wonder why…seems like there is some coordinated foreign policy amongst the CARICOM member nations…

  27. Pat

    Rumplestilkskin says:

    “International diplomacy is complicated, riddled with hypocrisy, side deals and self service.

    Human rights abuses are abhorrent but that’s true. However, in many cases these votes are only brought about when the named Nation itself offends the West.
    Where is the level playing field?

    Thus, while I understand your reactions, I cannot cirticise the Barbados vote unless I know the full circumstances in which given.”

    Dont bother with them. They run on raw emotion, no analysis, no consideration of extraneous factors. Just a gur reaction.

    Passing thru: we were discussing religious laws. I did not mention Jews in my post, as secular Jews are not subject to Judaic religious laws.

    Kathy: dont mention Hitler to me. Tell me where the Jews were when Hitler started eradicating the Roma, aka gypsies. He started on them first you know. Not only Jews suffered under the holocaust. Some 5 million non-Jews were exterminated, including 2 million non-ethnic Germans. Now, that should give you people something to chomp on and rant about.

  28. John

    No doubt there were cruel times and it is easy nowadays to forget the sacrifice made by many.

    Fifty million people died in the second world war. Russia and China lost the most, twenty million Russians and fifteen million Chinese died. In Russia, ten million soldiers and ten million civilians died.

    In both World Wars together, the Commonwealth lost one and a half million people. America lost far fewer than the Commonwealth.

    And if that loss of life in war was not terrible, in between wars, Stalin’s collectivisation of the farms caused starvation in the Ukraine which accounted for about ten million of his own people. That was in peace time!!

    The first world war had 5 million casualties, one tenth of the second world war, and half of what Stalin caused in peacetime to his own people.

    Man is inhuman to his fellow man. Doesn’t matter about religion. The Japanese were not Moslem or Christian and atheism was rammed down the Russians throats at the time of the second world war.

    Beliefs, make men and women go the extra mile to inflict the most horrible cruelty on other men and women. Religion can instill beliefs which can be bad or good, and that is true of all religions. Beliefs do not however come only from religion.

    I think Churchill recognised the good and the bad in the Moslem faith more than 100 years ago. I think it would be pointless to pretend the Christian faith is perfect. History will say otherwise.

    Somewhere along the road we need to recognise our own fallibility, humanity perhaps, and come to terms with it. We need to cut one another some slack because heaven knows, each one of us need it.

  29. John

    … but belief also has a good side.

    I gives people the ability to bear the unbearable and triumph in the end over evil. It is part of being human, just as crelty and inhumanity are also a part.

  30. Pogo

    Does anyone out there in BFP reader land really think that Barbados should get on board with those who support what Iran is doing? Abstaining from the vote might be the right thing to do at the UN but surely this country is not going to go along with these people simply because we are being offered money? It is time for our government to tell us where they stand and why they did what they did.

    If, as naive says, it was a mistake then let’s hear about it. If not (a more likely scenario) and the vote was on purpose please Mr. Arthur tell us why? We need to know that you have thought this through.

  31. akabozik

    Barbados abstained from the vote to cite Iran for human rights violations but then voted FOR IRAN to protect it from being held accountable for torture etc.

    such a strange position by Barbados

  32. reality check

    this is not a complicated exercise?

    some people in the GOB sold their vote ( conscience and all )

    everything is for sale!!!

    besides everyone loves to kick the big bully US

    sometimes they deserve it but it makes us feel good

    who we really sold out were everyday Iranians who desperately need greater human rights not just Barbadians

  33. John

    Our politicians have no philosophy or strong beliief in anything, except the almighty dollar.

    How do you expect to get an answer from Government when not one of our politicians knows how to answer a question that requires them to say what they actually believe?

  34. Pingback: Global Voices Online » Blog Archive » Barbados: Condoning human rights abuses

  35. Lady Anon

    You know, in reading this story and comments, my thinking is that this is a fundamental issue. Strip away the politics, the foreign policy etc, and what do you have?

    Purely male on female abuse…nicely wrapped up in islamic law, legislation etc.

    And what is Barbados’ position on male on female abuse? It is part of Barbadian “culture”.

    So what makes you think that Barbados will vote against it? Please, people.

  36. Rumplestilskin

    I am going to get flamed here, but what the heck.

    We talk about human rights and yes the above relates specifically to women. I mentioned that the international voting etc included side issues. The document referred actually had other questionable voting.

    Now, I am certainly no flag bearer for dictators and definitely not Saddam Hussein, but why is there not more outcry international over the method of his conviction?

    He should have been tried in the Hague, as all war criminals and major ‘dictators’.

    The Hague would have been under the UN, and would have at least, as shown by you all, have had some level of authority behind it.

    Instead, he has been tried by a court of an installed government, with judges changing midway during the ‘trial’.

    If any other country prosecuted to anyone by this method, we would be ridiculed internationally.

    The outcome of the Hague trial may have been the same, but it would at least have given the appearance of independence and fairness. The old adage ‘justice must not only be done but be seen to be done’.

    Nevertheless, those in authority there and those who support them ‘know what they are doing’.

    As an armchair amateur political analyst (haha), my thoughts query whether they are ready for the backlash, which I personally think could have been avoided had the trial been in the Hague.

    Bear in mind that the Saudi’s have already said that if USA leaves Iraq anytime soon, they will support the Sunnis. So that should indicate their allegiance.

    The only toher alternative to the trial, although I would not have been in favor, would have been to hold the trial after elections had been completed and then a judiciary appointed or reaffirmed.

    Howeever, the trial has gone ahead with an interim Government under questionable circumstances.

    The west fails to understand that whatever actions taken in the Middle East need to take into account perceptions by the other Arab states and resulting actions.

  37. BFP

    Hi Rumplestilskin

    While I agree with certain parts of your talk, and very much disagree with other parts – either way I won’t be flaming you because I respect your contributions to BFP.

    Far as the Middle East mess goes, nothing done by man is going to solve that – or at this stage make it any better. Just my opinion.

    Far as Saddam’s trial goes, it hardly matters in the whole context. Nothing would be good enough. No trial by any court, anywhere would satisfy everybody and dot every i, cross every t.

    Bottom line… They are going to execute a monster who gassed little children to death. Sunday for hanging is not soon enough.

    Also, please remember that for all time in the history of the world, there has only been one thing that brought peace – one thing that ends a war and virtually ensures peace… true victory – where one side truly wins and the other capitulates.

    No capitulation = No victory.

    Nobody is going to capitulate either in Iraq or the Middle East/Israel/Arab situation.

    Jesus come soon.

    Cliverton

  38. Pingback: Barbados Blocking UN Efforts To End Child Execution - Human Rights Watch « Barbados Free Press

  39. Pingback: Tiananmen Square Massacre 20 Years Later: Hugs and Kisses From Barbados As We Trade Our Silence For Cash « Barbados Free Press

  40. Pingback: World Press photo winner for 2010: Islamic misogyny | Barbados Free Press

  41. Pingback: Iran to hang Christian ‘convert’ for apostasy – Barbados supports Iranian human rights violations | Barbados Free Press

  42. Pingback: Why does the LGBT community give a pass to Muslim treatment of gays? | Barbados Free Press

  43. Who said they read anything these tag along bunch of idiots, probably on their blackberries and missed the whole debate.

  44. Pingback: Barbados ends reflagging of Iranian vessels | Barbados Free Press