Feminist activist in Iran sentenced to 24 years in prison for removing hijab.

The pro Israel lobby has engaged in lies, like the ones you outlined above, precisely because they view these lies the best way to bring liberals on their side. For me, as an Iranian, you can have anyone (left right or center) who believes in your version of reality on your side. I am satisfied if Iran only gets those Americans who have an interest in truth, in looking to find out that truth, and who are going to spread the truth when they discover it, on its side.

 

These Iranian women are showing astonishing courage!!!!!!!!!!

I am a Christian and I feel that I am supposed to emulate the courageous Apostle Paul to at least some degree........... It is inspiring to see women showing such courage over matters that I consider to be less important than the reasons why Paul got into so much trouble with the Roman and Jewish authorities!

 

AN EXCELLENT POINT INDEED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I am not trying to make any Westerner reach any particular conclusion or guide them towards in any agenda -- and anything they need to know based on a factual information is fine with me. (I can't even force them to reach conclusions based on facts. If they prefer, they can rely on propaganda and fiction. But as long as I am around, and the subject involves Iran or something I care about, I will do my part to tell the truth -- at least, the truth as I see it.

 

The key here is 'the truth as you see it'. That leaves a lot of room for error. You may want to consider further whether it's really everyone else who relies on 'propaganda and fiction' and not yourself..

 

Even those of us who are interested in just telling the truth, and who believe that ultimately nothing good emerges from lies for anyone with any serious ideology except a few whose job it is to tell such lies, are ultimately left to tell the 'truth' as we see it. But some of us are just in a better position to see things than others!

 

Lets say I was a journalist interested to give a factual account of the story in the OP. The story would be more as follows, providing both sides of the story:

"Facing a campaign organized by an Iranian feminist working with the US government, dubbed the "White Wednesday" movement, the Iranian judiciary has issued warnings to Iranian women cooperating or participating in this campaign, promising strict punishment for such acts. (See this report).

In connection with this crackdown, several Iranian women have recently been arrested and charged with various crimes in connection with their role and involvement in participating in protests organized by the leaders of the so-called "White Wednesday" movement. Among them, Saba Kord Afshari, who had previously been arrested for participating in similar protests and had already served a 1 year sentence for her actions.

This time around, the prosecutors have sought to make an example of her and a few other such women, charging them with attempting to entice public immorality and undermining state security. While no final sentence has been issued against her, reports based on statements from her family members indicate that a 15 year mandatory prison term has been handed down against Saba Kord Afshari.

Past practice shows that such tough sentences are not upheld on the review process akin to appeal in Iran's judicial system, and preliminary sentences in Iran's system are not binding until the appeal process is finalized. However, the imposition of such long sentences appears to signal that Iranian officials are worried about the possible reach and appeal of this movement. Many of the women involved, however, seem undeterred, showing tremendous courage in their fight to strike down Iran's hijab laws. Laws which, even if not strictly enforced and often ignored, provide that a woman who appears in public without the hijab can face a fine equivalent to $25 and serve a sentence of 10 days to 2 months in jail.

Iranian officials, however, justify such laws by noting that they represent cultural norms still supported by most Iranians, even though recent polls suggest that support for the hijab laws has declined substantially and today 49% of Iranians oppose them. These same officials justify the crackdown on the "White Wednesday" movement by noting that the movement is organized from outside by someone working for the US government and as part of a campaign by the US government to undermine Iran's regime. For this reason, even many reformist politicians opposed to the mandatory hijab laws, have also refused to be associated with the "White Wednesday" movement."
------

For facts and context, please refer to the report below -- as well as the video talking to the leader of the "White Wednesday" movement, who resides in the US and works for Voice of America.
https://www.apnews.com/badbd8290ae54e62b8d68b5c4a49ea4f

 

What are you wanting me to see in that?

 

Two things: first, in all these videos from Iran, you will see how the actual hijab rules are observed by Iranian women. You will see many examples of women whose hijab doesn't really cover much hair. Second, like many other such videos, if you pay close attention, you will see that many aren't even wearing the headscarf but pull them over their head only when they see the camera zooming on them. This also goes partly back to what you had asked about whether the kind of 'fashion' I showed to you was typical, when I had mentioned hijab being observed mostly in the breach in Iran.

 

What was the 'breach' again?

 

Covering your hair.

 

I should add this about that video and more generally. The women in that video are cheering Iran's national football team, often painting Iran's colors on their faces, with as much passion as anyone else. While many of them are unlikely to be among the supporters of Iran's hijab laws, one thing should be clear: they are as patriotic (if not more) than their male counterparts. The idea that many of them would welcome any attack on Iran, much less one allied with that bastion of women's rights, Wahhabi Arabia, as anything other than an attack on their country, is absurd. And equally untenable is the view that other than a small minority among them, the rest have nothing else to worry about in life than the hijab laws -- or that they would welcome Iran being thrown into chaos and lawlessness to achieve someone else's agenda of "implosion". For that reason, the war being waged on Iran, in all of its facets, is ultimately as much a war against these women as anyone else.

 

Not to be rude here, but you have several times made the assertion here that the draconian sentences had down in Iranian
courts won't really be carried out. Numerous news sources have reported on these sentences, and I have supplied links to
them in previous postings. Other than your word, do you have any links showing us that "Past practice shows that such tough
sentences are not upheld....." You have also said that Saba Kord Afshari was sentenced to 15 years, not 24. But, 24 years is
the sentence reported in the news articles about her. The Friendly Atheist article says, "Her sentences were increased by one-half because of "numerous charges and previous records."" https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com...rs-behind-bars-for-removing-compulsory-hijab/ I chose the Friendly Atheist simply because I wanted a source I had not
previously quoted. Numerous sources say pretty much the same thing.

 

When it comes to cases in Iran, and details about them, the only sources that would have anything reliable to say would be those reporting from Iran. Preferably, those with a clue about the system and with an interest to find the facts talking to the relevant parties in the case.

Iran's criminal system is based on the 'inquisitorial system' like the one in France as opposed to the adversary system you have in the US. In the inquisitorial system in Iran, the first stage is an investigation by a magistrate judge. Once he finishes his investigation, he then issues his findings. This is not exactly akin to a 'trial' verdict in the US. And those findings are actually meant to be confidential to protect the rights of the accused. You then have what is imprecisely called an appeal in these reports, and a trial in other reports, where the accused has the chance to question the findings of the investigative judge. Only when that process has completed, is a final sentence issued and announced. While that verdict could still be appealed, that verdict would be a final judgment that can be reported and disclosed to the public.

Bearing all that in mind:
1- 24 years or 15 years? The charges against her could accumulate to 24 years if she would have to serve all of them one after another under the aggravation of charges that would be applicable. But in Iran, the prison sentence will be based on the charge that carries the longest term, with the longest term here increased to 15 years because of her prior record. You could kind of understand that if you could properly read between the lines of the Radio Farda/Radio Europe report I had cited for you. Or maybe in even some of the reports with the misleading headlines you are citing!

These reports ultimately don't rely on any official publication of the sentence, since her case hasn't reached the stage where it would be considered 'final' for the sentence to be announced. In fact, Iranian law prohibits disclosure of such sentences and giving the name of the accused until a final sentence has been issued. But there are a handful of dissident groups in Iran, who are more or less tolerated (although they sometimes get closed down), which nonetheless rely on "leaks" from lawyers, husbands, moms and dad and other relatives involved in these cases to make premature announcements aimed at being picked up by the usual suspects. And that is the origin of these reports: a post on Facebook by her fiance/husband. That post is then dressed up as some sort of a real report and duplicated in various media outlets as the ones I mentioned and picked up by others, who then spin them further.

The original report is the one below and some have tried to translate it verbatim while others have apparently felt even a verbatim translation of what is ultimately a propagandized version of the story is not enough!
https://salameno.ir/detail/27280471
یک فعال مدنی زن با اتهام کشف حجاب و اشاعه فحشا به 24 سال حبس محکوم شد که 15 سال آن قابل اجراست
"A civil activist has been convicted of 24 years for failing to wear the Hijab and Spreading Immorality, with 15 years of the sentence being subject to enforcement"
The report then explains how they have come up with these numbers, where after applying the increases that would apply to each sentence due to her prior record, the total comes to 24 years but then noting that she will only have to serve 15 years.

 

"Wahhabi Arabia?"

 

aka Saudi Arabia.

 

Pick up a news paper. It was a high profile case

You go source where you came up with that one.

 

How much rational thought is required to understand that sending a woman to jail for two months for not wearing a head scarf is ignorant and brutal. Because this is Iranian law Iran will be judged accordingly.

 

Even using your Iranian version the results show a government steeped in ignorance and barbarism. And the Theocracy create enemies so very easily, typical of the what George Orwell wrote of in 1984.

 

Is it more ignorant and brutal than extra judicary death penalties?

 

Are you referring to murder? Both are ignorant.

 

Your government does that alot. You know firing a drone rocket into some afghani village to get one guy and killing dozens of civilians nearby.

 

Your judgments aren't the issue to me, particularly since you aren't in any position to judge. The lies are simply because I don't like lies. I have said that plenty enough times already.

 

In fact I'm in an excellent position to judge, just as you are. Of course our judgements may not always be correct.

 

To be in a position to judge means being in a position where we have a say proscribing the actions which we don't approve. You don't have any such say, but that doesn't mean you can't speak your mind. Speak it as you wish. And I will do the same, although on these issues, I also have a little say too. I get to vote for people who make the laws or oppose them in Iran's parliament.