Secretary Clinton Welcomes UN Resolution Calling on Iran To Respect Human Rights

Posted by DipNote Bloggers
December 22, 2010
Discussions at the UN General Assembly in New York

Secretary Clinton issued a statement today on the UN General Assembly's resolution on Iran's human rights violations. The statement said:

"The United States welcomes the UN General Assembly resolution calling on the Government of Iran to fully respect its human rights obligations. This resolution also reiterates the need for Iran to permit credible and independent investigations of all allegations of human rights violations.

"The international community is deeply concerned about ongoing human rights abuses in Iran and the plight of Iranian citizens facing persecution at the hands of their government. Yesterday's UN resolution recognizes the severity of this troubling situation, particularly the continued harassment, persecution, and violent repression of political opponents, human rights defenders, and a wide variety of civil society representatives. It reflects our concern that an increasing number of Iranian political prisoners have had to undertake life-threatening hunger strikes in order to invoke their minimal due process protections. These rights are enumerated in Iran's own constitution and called for under Iran's international treaty obligations.

"To all those Iranians struggling to lift your voices and speak up for fundamental freedoms and human rights, you are not alone. The United States and the international community stand with you."

The text of the statement is also available here.



Shastri P.
Illinois, USA
December 22, 2010

Shastri P. in Illinois writes:

Thank you!

Syrian P.
December 22, 2010

S.N.P. in Syria writes:

When will the U.N. issue a resolution deploring the non existance of any Human Rights in Saudi Arabia? The Saudis can not even gather and have voices be heard.

The U.N. is a cheap tool, only fools will take it seriousely.

adri D.
December 22, 2010

Adri D. in Indonesia writes:

Thank you

New Mexico, USA
December 23, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Dear Sec. Clinton, (part 1 of 3)

In regards to Iran, there are things to do and promises to keep. There are few options left on the table as we speak.

"This resolution also reiterates the need for Iran to permit credible and independent investigations of all allegations of human rights violations."
-Sec. Clinton

When the government falls and a new one is installed then that will be possible Madam Secretary. But asking the criminal to investigate himself is a non-starter for seeking justice for their crimes against humanity and uncovering mass graves.

"The international community is deeply concerned about ongoing human rights abuses in Iran and the plight of Iranian citizens facing persecution at the hands of their government."
-Sec. Clinton

The UN has passed well over fifty resolutions of this type on Iran over the years with almost the exact same wording.

What exactly does "concerned" really mean if the international community does absolutely nothing about stopping it, other than make a fuss about it?

Well, My guess is this means "concern" is a realative sense of caring about it that feels good to the UN member states while doing nothing at all about it and letting it continue unabated much to the great misery of the Iranian people. Such is the results over time.

And you wonder why people question the UN's resolve in these matters Madam Secretary? Or multiple US administrations and it's Foreign Policy regarding Iran? Sanctions alone won't resolve this, the Iranian government won't resolve this, and only "regime replacement therapy" has any chance at all of doing so.
Somethings Madam Secretary, are all too self-evident over a great deal of time and come at much cost to the innocent, as well as harming US reputation as a "beacon of hope" for oppressed peoples the longer we only express concern and fail to act decisivly on that concern.

"To all those Iranians struggling to lift your voices and speak up for fundamental freedoms and human rights, you are not alone."
-Sec. Clinton

Speaking to you Madam Secretary as a private citizen of the US that has done a few things to help the Iranian people have a voice in the matter, I am including in this message to you a letter to Jason Gruder of the Iran desk written in the late fall of 2005. (see part 2-3).
It is my hope that this administration will take it upon itself to provide the follow-through needed at this time.

Thanks for your consideration in this matter.


New Mexico, USA
December 23, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

(part 2 of 3- "Forum for the future")

To: Mr. Jason Bruder
US Dept. of State, Iran Desk

Dear Mr. Bruder,

Regarding our brief phone conversation last week, and your interest in taking a look at a proposal for constructing a dialogue between various groups and individuals within the Iranian/American community in opposition to the current regime in Iran, and the US Dept. of State; I wish to express my thanks for your interest on behalf of the groups and individuals included in this outline proposal.

Noting the State Dept's dialogue with other opposition groups among various nations in the effort to promote democratic institutions and inclusiveness in political fora and the President’s stated policy of support for the Iranian people's liberty, constructing an ongoing dialogue seems to be a logical step in fostering understanding and voicing ideas and feedback regarding issues of mutual concern.
Such a dialogue with the US Gov., as well as with other free nation's representatives in a roundtable "Forum of the Future"; inclusive of a vetted cross section, representative of the varied Iranian groups in dialogue between themselves and between nations with interest in human rights, democracy, and concerned within the context of security issues; may become mutually beneficial if not essential to building trust and a road forward.

In an interview with the New York Post Editorial Board September 15, 2005, Secretary Condoleezza Rice stated in answer to a question regarding the President’s position in support of the Iranian people’s aspirations for liberty:

“Well, the problem in Iran is that the train is going the other way right now. The hardliners have managed, I think, to – for the time being – silence any organized opposition and you have the sense that it’s difficult for the population, which is (inaudible) deeply dissatisfied with their government, but it’s difficult for the population to find someplace to adhere, you know, you need a focal point and I think they’re having -- there’s (inaudible) trouble in doing that.

But in Iran, we do have some democracy programs that we’re doing. They’re small and they’re doing them through nongovernmental organizations because we don’t want to give the government a reason to crack down on what little democratic activity there is in Iran.

The second point is that the Iranian people would – the United States Government is very popular with the Iranian people.”


On one hand Secretary Rice has a point when she says that American support may give cause to the regime for crackdowns, but the reality is they don't need an excuse, and they are actively suppressing any and all dissent in Iran regardless of the level of American support to the point where in a few years there won't be an opposition in Iran because they'll all be in mass graves or in some hell-hole of a prison.

(cont. in part 3)

New Mexico, USA
December 23, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

(part 3 of 3)

The point I must stress here in terms of American credibility with those seeking and badly needing our support and that of the international community is that there are no halfway measures that may prove effective. Halfway measures don’t produce results, whether that is on nuclear issues or human rights issues, or in regards to state sponsors of terrorism. Standing on principal cannot be with one foot in any case, including support for democracy.
As I look at this in all its aspects with regards to Iran, both with the people and the government as separate tracks, I’ll be very blunt in saying that the war of ideas as it pertains to support for democratic change cannot be won unless full tilt effort in concrete ways to hold the mullah’s regime to account along with total and uncompromising support is given to the Iranian people to effect change from within. Such support begins with a dialogue.

It is sir, this realization that provides incentive for this proposal, and the interest within the Iranian/American opposition community for a comprehensive dialogue with the US government, and other free nation’s representatives that may be interested parties, such as the EU, Canada, Russia perhaps as a member of “the Quartet”, as well as the UN.

In submitting this proposal to you sir, my “onus” is that of a loyal US citizen standing in support of the policies of the United States, and “standing with” the Iranian people’s aspirations for liberty, as they stand united in seeking it for themselves. As such, there is no conflict of interest in doing so. I’m just trying to bring a few folks together to solve some common problems.

The idea of constructing an ongoing dialogue (beginning with a roundtable “forum of the future”) is simple in inception and purpose. The Dept. of State is in the business of fostering understanding between people, the voicing of ideas and feedback regarding issues of mutual concern, and building trust and a road forward, every day of the year in multilateral and bilateral setting.

It stands to reason that the Dept. of State in considering such a dialogue would have a vast experience in conducting and hosting such meetings, and so I will not prejudge how such a such a dialogue may be best constructed, or by what format, or level of government representation.

There is concurrence that should all the individuals and groups listed herein, sit down in conference, that a round table be the literal setting, as excepting for the host, no one is above another, and all have a place of honor. And so I pose this as suggestion.

I would suggest also that a target date sometime in January may be reasonable to achieve, and in light of the “Iran Freedom and Support Act” most likely being reintroduced in the new session of Congress next year, that such a conference may be of great value to the members of Congress in reference to this bill.

Such a conference setting may also coincide with Canada’s UN resolution on human rights in Iran, possible IAEA referral of Iran to the UN Security Council, and other possible measures in regards to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s (IRI) state sponsorship of terrorism.
Insofar as “Iranian solutions” may be presented, it is my hope that they will present the international community with additional options on the table, with respect to dealing with the IRI, through diplomacy or otherwise.

It would not be reasonable to expect concurrence on all issues, but it is my hope that out of such a conference may come a joint statement on issues that are agreed upon by all parties.

As well, it is my belief that constructing a dialogue is not a “one-shot” deal, by having a single conference, when what would be most effective in the long run is ongoing contact after such a conference is concluded, with perhaps with future conferences being mutually agreed upon by the parties.

In conclusion sir, I believe this idea is one whose time has come to implement, in support of US foreign policy and the Iranian people. I am sure the following interested parties will be happy to discuss the matter, provide full bio’s and give feedback of their own accord on any questions the Dept. of State may have regarding this proposal.
Thank you again for your consideration.



(note to Dipnote staff: list of groups submitted are redacted here for posting and privacy and available upon official request.

I realize this forum is not "an official form of communication" with the Dept of State and so as it is my hope that someone at the Iran desk reads this and perhaps will pass this on up through channels to the Sec. perhaps you may make folks aware of this posting, and please give Mr. Bruder my best regards if you do so, thanks.)

John P.
December 24, 2010

John P. in Greece writes:

@S.N.P. in …?
long time no see!

Hows things in Syria?

New Mexico, USA
December 24, 2010

Eric in New Mexico writes:

News Item;

A man suspected of helping to smuggle arms from Iran across the border for the Taliban in Afghanistan has been detained, Nato officials say.

The man was held in the Zheri district of Kandahar, a province known as the birthplace of the Taliban movement.

...He "was considered a Kandahar-based weapons facilitator with direct ties to other Taliban leaders in the province," the Isaf statement added.

"Iranian intelligence officers are helping the Taliban and drug dealers in the south. We deal with it every day. This is a known fact now. It was the international forces who arrested him. They had been listening to him for some time and monitoring his electronic communications."

-(unamed) "..senior Afghan security official in Kandahar..."

(excerpts from BBC News report)


I have always maintained that to mix religion and politics is to corrupt both, and this stands as reason enough to separate mosque from state.

In Iran's case, the question of whether a Shiite-State Sponsor of terror would support Al Quaida-a Suni terrorist not one that some are willing to accept, in the think-tank community.

So "Where in the world is Bin Laden?"

I think beyond any reporting that Iran would have a hard time explaining his presence,...but one must accept possibilities and the probabilities of safe haven, and sanctuary given.

So about supporting Afghan's human rights to be free of armed interferance supporting armed conflict and providing material support to terrorism; is not to sin in political or religious silence at this point.

"Jihad" as a means to political control over territory is not worthy of Islam.

That definition of a "sacred war" I believe is more an internal struggle within the individual believer to walk a path with heart correctly through life.

But I'm just an Buddhist "infidel", what do I know?

...that only when the people themselves rise up against this misunderstanding will it stop.

..."all nations must choose peace."
-Barak Obama

I propose a Fifth Freedom;

"Freedom from prejudice."

As a means to securing the promise held within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Not mearly on racial or ethnic grounds as a component of "freedom from fear", but regarding those who would prejudice the peace with declarations of war, in a blend with "freedom from want" as to never deny a nation's right to exist through conflict.

Or pervert the peace of minds through violent intent in any form.

Thus becomes unique thinking among the family of nations to that end and imaginitive means, lest the UN's "Workshop for Peace" stagnate in purpose.

We build nations don't we? Palestinians are promised one, Israeli's want one to permanently call home, and every Iraqi and Afghan must have their day too to build one...for themselves.

And so as we open the door to a new decade in this 21st century, "A world anew" or ...same as it ever was...begs the question of how do we get there from here?

Too afraid to step through to the other side?

Or too complacent?

As time waits for no one, so don't folks be late.

History has not been kind to the tardy, in terms of changing mindsets.

For the puiblic being "in the winter of our discontent", is past due rent on the promise of peace.

"We can do this , so long as we remember our joy."

Is how to walk through hard times with grace.

Peace...not this.

Let's do it for the kids.


Syrian P.
December 27, 2010

S.N.P. in Syria writes:

@Eric in N.M., Finally a good sign of positive development happened. Fed removed In God We Trust off new fiat currency design coming to your local bank by March, but they kept Amen phallic symbol prominent on the new bill design. Can I convince you that all religions are invented by aliens who are after human enslavement. Religion is nothing more than an Alien (both extraterrestrial and subterranean) subversive organization promo gated with the intention of wrestling power and wealth from the State and people.

@John P, in Greece, nice to hear from you. It is very frustrating to see this great country, having at its disposal the best brains in the world, keeps on making one lousy policy after another. This is how catastrophic system failure happens in the end. So I quit posting here and spent time doing nice artworks to relax and ease-up. Ugggghh, to answer your questions, it could not get any worse in Syria, partially thanks to President Obama admin. A whole bunch of worrisome reports on my desk. But the strategy is working and the Status Quo is surely becoming unbearable to all. So let’s hope that system failure is coming soon. It appears that is the only light at end of the tunnel. I tell you, many SNP members were so upset with the Iraq war, now we are envious of the relative economic and political freedom they have. If you to remove war from the equation, there still ways to achieve the same ends mean.


Latest Stories