Sunday News Post: 27/09/2015

Saudi Arabia plans to crucify protester as it ascends to UN Human Rights Council chair



                             

In a move that has drawn severe criticism from numerous organizations and activist groups from around the world, Saudi Arabia, which was tapped last week to head the Human Rights Council at the UN, is preparing to crucify and behead a protester who was still a minor at the time of his arrest, the BBC reported Wednesday.

Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr, a member of Saudi Arabia's Shi'ite minority, was convicted on a variety of charges including taking part in anti-government protests, breaking alliance with the king, sedition, rioting and attacking security patrols in 2011. Nimr was 17 years old when Saudi authorities arrested him.

As a signatory of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Saudi Arabia is forbidden from enacting capital punishment against people under the age of 18. UN human rights experts also added that al-Nimr was subjected to torture and did not receive a fair trial.

"Any judgment imposing the death penalty upon persons who were children at the time of the offense, and their execution, are incompatible with Saudi Arabia's international obligations," the UN group said in a statement Tuesday.

Despite Saudi Arabia possessing  "arguably the worst record in the world" in terms of women's rights and dissidents, on September 17 the kingdom was chosen to lead a powerful five-member group of ambassadors, according to CNN. 

Sunday News Post: 21/09/2015

Fury after Saudi Arabia 'chosen to head key UN human rights panel'

The United Nations has been criticised for handing Saudi Arabia a key human rights role - despite the country having “arguably the worst record in the world” on freedoms for women, minorities and dissidents.

Critics, including the wife of imprisoned pro-democracy blogger Raif Badawi – sentenced to 1,000 lashes for blogging about free speech – labelled the appointment “scandalous”, saying it meant “oil trumps human rights”.

Mr Badawi’s wife, Ensaf Haidar, who is leading an international campaign to free her husband, said on Facebook that handing the role to Faisal bin Hassan Trad, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador at the UN in Geneva, was effectively “a green light to start flogging [him] again”.

UN Watch, an independent campaigning NGO, revealed Mr Trad, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador at the UN in Geneva, was elected as chair of a panel of independent experts on the UN Human Rights Council.

Opinions:

I think that choosing a country with such a questionable Human rights record to head a "Human Rights panel" is clearly a poorly thought thing to do, this leads me to believe that there is something more at play here. My first cynical reaction would be bribery, but on the other hand it could be that the country is looking to improve there image by leading this panel in a competent and fair way. I personally would vie for the first option, though perhaps straight Bribery; but rather a "You help me here, Ill help you later" sort of deal. 

Fox News Analysis

Fox News is an American news corporation, it has a right wing viewpoint as is infamous for it's fear mongering and often heavily exaggerated headlines, or in some cases; flat out false information. Around the time of the Charlie Hebdo attacks in France they aired a story based on Muslim extremism in Europe, they clearly saw this as an opportunity to drum up anti-Muslim sentiment as it is a widely reported topic and a cause of much controversy within the US. They brought In a "Terror Expert" who claimed that Birmingham had areas of "No go" if you were not a Muslim and that Muslims out numbered Christians within the city. These type of slanderous stories drum up so much interest due to their shocking and though provoking nature, the issue with this is that the average Fox viewer is not likely to look up opposing viewpoints and make an informed decision on the subject but rather believe what they had seen just because it had been on the television.

Their slogan of "Fair and Balanced" reporting holds true. As long as it comes from an agreeable viewpoint that reflects their right wing ideals. The largest problem with this organisation is they're no longer reporting the news in the traditional sense, their opinions are not unbiased and their topics do not span a broad range of subjects. They would never run a piece on Pollution or Gay rights as that would not get them the ratings or appeal to their target audience. Their programming acts more like a reality television show rather than a News channel, in fact a lot of their headlines are hardly distinguishable from satirical news sites.

Monday News Post: 14/09/2015

Two British ISIS jihadis killed by RAF drone 'gave themselves away when they phoned friends at home in the UK' 

The two British ISIS jihadists killed in Syria when they were blitzed by a drone controlled by RAF pilots 3,000 miles away gave away their location when they phoned friends in the UK.

Reyaad Khan, 21, and Rahul Amin, 26, were killed when one of them made a phone call allowing security staff at GCHQ in Cheltenham to intercept the conversation and pinpoint their location in the Syrian desert.

British intelligence agents on the ground then confirmed which car the pair were travelling in and relayed the information back to controllers 3,000 miles away at RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire.

My Thoughts:

Although it is a tragedy that these men were even drawn to ISIS' regime, this acts as a deterrent to future British men who are seduced by their regime. You can't rape and pillage all day and call Mum for a chat in the evening, and hopefully this shows how alone these Men are as they lose all semblance of their former lives. I'm in two minds about this being reported however, it acts as anti propaganda and deters British men for joining the regime but it also gives away a technological advantage now that ISIS knows about this. Part of me thinks this shouldn't have been reported so it can be used more effectively in the future.