It had only been a few days since the election of the new chairman of the United Nations Human Rights Commission when the Islamic regime showed the true colors Shia Mafia by hanging three more young men.
Undoubtedly, the constant question asked by a majority of Iranians and victims of human rights at the hands of the Islamic regime, from the United Nations Human Rights Committee and also its members who chose a natural killer as a judge and created a humanitarian disaster, is whether the countries that voted for the Regime, an accomplice in the daily crimes of this government?
Although the substantiated evidence of this organization shows the Islamic Regime as a frequent violator of human rights, the actions of these voters in the framework of the United Nations human rights either support the crimes of the dictators ruling in Iran or, at the very least, encourage it!
Hitler did not commit great crimes and carry out genocide by himself; the various statesmen and politicians of the countries who cooperated with Hitler were also guilty by proxy and perpetrators of those great crimes. Today, the same scenario is being implemented in a different form under the title of “diplomacy” and behind closed doors, and its lifespan is as long as the inauspicious birth of the Islamic Revolution in Iran.
Overt or covert cooperation with a system that violates all human rights and international principles does not adhere to any regulations or go unseen. Hence, the philosophy of the Islamic Regime, as they have declared from the founder and leader to its agents, emphasises their missiles; the destruction of other countries, especially Israel.
Maybe some people consider this behavior to be just a slogan. Still, this view is entirely naive and stems from the lack of recognition of the destructive power of the violent “Ayatollahs” because the criminal regime’s behavior exposes it all. In addition to destroying Iran, it has sent people from Yemen and Iraq to Syria and Lebanon to death; even in that very Palestine, the only cause of misery comes from the treasury of the Iranian nation, which is being plundered.
Westerners, as the principal owners of the Islamic Revolution, used the language of appeasement in front of their 40-plus-year-old delinquent children during the years when this shameful legacy sacrificed four generations, and Iran has been gutted. This approach is similar to that of parents having to handle their bratty children!
On the other hand, the double standard of the Westerners in facing the Islamic Regime is a tragic-comedy story. Just a few months ago, during the national protests surrounding the mandatory hijab regulations, the Islamic Regime was expelled from the United Nations Committee on Women’s Affairs. Still, now the social key of human rights has been placed in a golden tray for the Khomeinists. After this final forgiveness from the West, the Ayatollahs go and hang three young men.
The non-adherence to Western principles and values, which are an integral part of European and American culture and life, has now been forgotten by Western politicians in such a way that their interactions or, better, their relations with the Islamic Regime expand the hypothesis that in the same example, the definition of “perfect coexistence” Westerners are immersed in the Islamic Regime’s abyss of corruption.
Does one laugh or cry about the state of these affairs? But, of course, financing of the financial sector or the budget of the United Nations Human Rights Commission is provided through the taxpayers of different countries. So, in simple terms, corrupt politicians who choose the Islamic Regime, even citizens who have worked hard and paid taxes in those countries, share in the crimes of Ali Khamenei, his associates and followers, like being a shareholder in a company!
What is clear now is that the nationwide patriotic protests in Iran, which kicked off in the name of “woman, life, freedom”, is that the Iranian people could no longer tolerate this worthless system. In this regard, the Islamic Regime, which is practically incapable of running the country, can only survive by creating terror. The regime authorities consider it to be “preventive repression”. During the last six months, more than 300 people have been executed and murdered.
These are the individuals who were among the identified; many remain anonymous. The Islamic Regime is still trying to reconcile with the West behind closed doors, to drag greedy Westerners into this game of pillar-to-post with promises of short-term profits.
The Islamic Regime has found the West’s weak point during these years and has its pulse, even when it comes to human rights and the brutal behavior of the Islamic Regime. All they have to do is for the regime’s leaders to pull the word “diplomacy” out of their magic turban and declare: Human rights are separate from politics.
All the embassies of the Western countries in Iran fully monitor and see the dissatisfaction of the Iranian people and, more importantly, their clear opposition to the ruling dictators. What reports do these embassies give to their governments? Do they not see that the people of Iran do not want an Islamic Regime and how fiercely they are fighting to bring down the occupier terrorists?
Instead of calling their ambassadors and closing the embassies of the Islamic Regime as places of promotion, violence, and terror, the Westerners should expel the terrorists and shut down all the Islamic terrorist centers along with thousands of economic and cultural companies. Instead, it has placed a crown of flowers on the neck of the Islamic Regime, and by legitimizing execution and torture, it is validating the shameful acts of terrorism without borders.
Naturally, it is expected. The West must stand firmly on the resolutions of the United Nations and expel the countries that violate human rights from this organization; otherwise, instead of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, they should change their name to the Human Rights Violators Commission, relying on all-round support for terrorism and terrorists!
What is clear is that the movement, behavior, and performance of an international forum or organization, which was founded in the direction of human discourse and claims to support communities victimized by terrorism, must be consistent with its name. Otherwise, why not offer a seat to the Taliban and other bandits in a place where the Islamic regime has been offered a seat? Isn’t this discrimination when the Islamic Regime is elected as the head of the Human Rights Commission? In which case why do the Taliban have no representative in the Human Rights Council?