The first charter on human rights was authored by Cyrus the Great over 2500 years ago. As Iranians we are heirs to a proud tradition of human rights and tolerance. Sadly, the Iranian authorities have not lived up to this legacy, as can be seen by the mock trials, false imprisonments, torture, child executions, and lack of equality for women in Iran today.
For the past 30 years the Iranian government has barred Amnesty International from entering the country, affording us no transparency in regards to its human rights record. However, advances in technology and the internet are allowing brave Iranian activists to share direct eyewitness accounts of what is happening on ground zero in the post-election crackdown: brutal attacks on and murder of peaceful protestors, wrongful imprisonment without access to an attorney or fair trial, forced confessions obtained under torture and duress, rape used as a weapon of torture in prisons, and the lack of freedom of assembly as seen in the case of the ‘Mourning Mothers’ whose only “crime” was gathering for an hour each Saturday in a peaceful vigil near the place and time of the killing of protester Neda Agha-Soltan.
Despite the dangers posed to protesters, Iranians continue to take to the streets in hundreds of thousands to demand their universally recognized rights. The movement has grown beyond simply contesting the results of the presidential election. It has morphed into a Civil Rights movement of the magnitude seen in the United States in the 50’s and 60’s, uniting Iranians across a broad spectrum of political ideologies, bridging our differences for the first time in 30 years, with a single goal in mind: Freedom.
Today, I stand in solidarity with the people of Iran in demanding a fair and democratic society where the 30 articles of the UN Declaration of Human Rights are fully realized. Together we can ensure that their pleas for freedom are not going unheard by the international community, that their struggle is not in vain, and that they will prevail.
– Nazanin Boniadi
The reference to Cyrus the great in this post is inappropriate, as one of the major contributors to wikiproject human rights on wikipedia, we have extensively considered and examined that document and we concluded that the viewpoint that the Cryus Cylinder was a "human rights" text is a fringe theory not supported by evidence ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_the…. For amnesty international to claim it as such gives undue weight to a theory that has been used to hide and legitimise human rights abuses.
The reference to Cyrus the great in this post is inappropriate, as one of the major contributors to wikiproject human rights on wikipedia, we have extensively considered and examined that document and we concluded that the viewpoint that the Cryus Cylinder was a "human rights" text is a fringe theory not supported by evidence ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_the…. For amnesty international to claim it as such gives undue weight to a theory that has been used to hide and legitimise human rights abuses.
The reference to Cyrus the great in this post is inappropriate, as one of the major contributors to wikiproject human rights on wikipedia, we have extensively considered and examined that document and we concluded that the viewpoint that the Cryus Cylinder was a "human rights" text is a fringe theory not supported by evidence ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_the…. For amnesty international to claim it as such gives undue weight to a theory that has been used to hide and legitimise human rights abuses.
As much as I wish to support any human rights and will always call for the criminalization of the despots who perpetrate such behavior. Having said that I am also leery of publicly helping another country within that area of the world as it seems inevitable that their troubles down the line will be blamed on "those meddling Americans again………
The reference to Cyrus the great in this post is inappropriate, as one of the major contributors to wikiproject human rights on wikipedia, we have extensively considered and examined that document and we concluded that the viewpoint that the Cryus Cylinder was a “human rights” text is a fringe theory not supported by evidence ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard/Archive_13#Cyrus_cylinder_as_a_charter_of_human_rights). For amnesty international to claim it as such gives undue weight to a theory that has been used to hide and legitimise human rights abuses.
I hope we can witness a change in Iran. It is unfortunate to think that such a beautiful nation, kind people, and marveling history should undergo the grievance that they now face. The injustice must end, and may this be the beginning of the end to the killings, torture, rapes, and injustice that the Iranians are facing. Unfortunately, the unfairness they are now facing is not something new; it has been going on for far too long. The Iranian people need our support now more than ever, and to feel that we are in agreement with them and that it is time for the change. My heart goes out to the Iranian people, may this battle be won by the righteousness that supports the people’s actions.
As much as I wish to support any human rights and will always call for the criminalization of the despots who perpetrate such behavior. Having said that I am also leery of publicly helping another country within that area of the world as it seems inevitable that their troubles down the line will be blamed on “those meddling Americans again………
I hope we can witness a change in Iran. It is unfortunate to think that such a beautiful nation, kind people, and marveling history should undergo the grievance that they now face. The injustice must end, and may this be the beginning of the end to the killings, torture, rapes, and injustice that the Iranians are facing. Unfortunately, the unfairness they are now facing is not something new; it has been going on for far too long. The Iranian people need our support now more than ever, and to feel that we are in agreement with them and that it is time for the change. My heart goes out to the Iranian people, may this battle be won by the righteousness that supports the people’s actions.
Ajbpearce,
Although it has become a topic of debate, the Cyrus Cylinder is still considered by many historians and scholars to be the first document of human rights known to man, thus the author's claim is not false.
United Nations: http://www.un.org/temp/humanrightsday/history.sht…
Per http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Cyrus_c…
"Since the 1970s, the Cyrus Cylinder has been described as the world’s first charter of human rights, It was translated into all six official U.N. languages in 1971. A replica of the cylinder is kept at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City… However, while the cylinder clearly reports Cyrus' policy of restoring local religious shrines and ending certain forms of forced labor, some scholars have argued that it is overstating the fact to call the document a human rights charter."
In order to discredit the Cylinder as the first charter or document on human rights known to man, it is advisable to clearly state what is in fact the first charter. Most scholars and historians have failed to do so, or at least fail to widely agree on a first charter or document on human rights, other than Cyrus the Great's.
Even if it is scientifically proven that it is not actually the first charter or document on human rights, and an alternative is provided, this does not take away from the fact that it is most definitely among the first known to man. Thus the author's reference to the Cyrus Cylinder as a way of establishing the region's historical commitment to human rights and tolerance and contrasting it to its current despicable state of affairs, is not invalid.
It seems your concern is that it should not be called the first "charter on human rights", but rather the first "document on human rights", or perhaps "among the first human rights documents known to man". However, the point of this blog entry is of far more significance than for us to waste time arguing over the use of words at this time.
Ajbpearce,
Although it has become a topic of debate, the Cyrus Cylinder is still considered by many historians and scholars to be the first document of human rights known to man, thus the author's claim is not false.
United Nations: http://www.un.org/temp/humanrightsday/history.sht…
Per http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Cyrus_c…
"Since the 1970s, the Cyrus Cylinder has been described as the world’s first charter of human rights, It was translated into all six official U.N. languages in 1971. A replica of the cylinder is kept at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City… However, while the cylinder clearly reports Cyrus' policy of restoring local religious shrines and ending certain forms of forced labor, some scholars have argued that it is overstating the fact to call the document a human rights charter."
In order to discredit the Cylinder as the first charter or document on human rights known to man, it is advisable to clearly state what is in fact the first charter. Most scholars and historians have failed to do so, or at least fail to widely agree on a first charter or document on human rights, other than Cyrus the Great's.
Even if it is scientifically proven that it is not actually the first charter or document on human rights, and an alternative is provided, this does not take away from the fact that it is most definitely among the first known to man. Thus the author's reference to the Cyrus Cylinder as a way of establishing the region's historical commitment to human rights and tolerance and contrasting it to its current despicable state of affairs, is not invalid.
It seems your concern is that it should not be called the first "charter on human rights", but rather the first "document on human rights", or perhaps "among the first human rights documents known to man". However, the point of this blog entry is of far more significance than for us to waste time arguing over the use of words at this time.
Ajbpearce,
Although it has become a topic of debate, the Cyrus Cylinder is still considered by many historians and scholars to be the first document of human rights known to man, thus the author's claim is not false.
United Nations: http://www.un.org/temp/humanrightsday/history.sht…
Per http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Cyrus_c…
"Since the 1970s, the Cyrus Cylinder has been described as the world’s first charter of human rights, It was translated into all six official U.N. languages in 1971. A replica of the cylinder is kept at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City… However, while the cylinder clearly reports Cyrus' policy of restoring local religious shrines and ending certain forms of forced labor, some scholars have argued that it is overstating the fact to call the document a human rights charter."
In order to discredit the Cylinder as the first charter or document on human rights known to man, it is advisable to clearly state what is in fact the first charter. Most scholars and historians have failed to do so, or at least fail to widely agree on a first charter or document on human rights, other than Cyrus the Great's.
Even if it is scientifically proven that it is not actually the first charter or document on human rights, and an alternative is provided, this does not take away from the fact that it is most definitely among the first known to man. Thus the author's reference to the Cyrus Cylinder as a way of establishing the region's historical commitment to human rights and tolerance and contrasting it to its current despicable state of affairs, is not invalid.
It seems your concern is that it should not be called the first "charter on human rights", but rather the first "document on human rights", or perhaps "among the first human rights documents known to man". However, the point of this blog entry is of far more significance than for us to waste time arguing over the use of words at this time.
Ajbpearce,
Although it has become a topic of debate, the Cyrus Cylinder is still considered by many historians and scholars to be the first document of human rights known to man, thus the author’s claim is not false.
United Nations:
http://www.un.org/temp/humanrightsday/history.shtml
Per http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Cyrus_cylinder:
“Since the 1970s, the Cyrus Cylinder has been described as the world’s first charter of human rights, It was translated into all six official U.N. languages in 1971. A replica of the cylinder is kept at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City… However, while the cylinder clearly reports Cyrus’ policy of restoring local religious shrines and ending certain forms of forced labor, some scholars have argued that it is overstating the fact to call the document a human rights charter.”
In order to discredit the Cylinder as the first charter or document on human rights known to man, it is advisable to clearly state what is in fact the first charter. Most scholars and historians have failed to do so, or at least fail to widely agree on a first charter or document on human rights, other than Cyrus the Great’s.
Even if it is scientifically proven that it is not actually the first charter or document on human rights, and an alternative is provided, this does not take away from the fact that it is most definitely among the first known to man. Thus the author’s reference to the Cyrus Cylinder as a way of establishing the region’s historical commitment to human rights and tolerance and contrasting it to its current despicable state of affairs, is not invalid.
It seems your concern is that it should not be called the first “charter on human rights”, but rather the first “document on human rights”, or perhaps “among the first human rights documents known to man”. However, the point of this blog entry is of far more significance than for us to waste time arguing over the use of words at this time.
we live in this world rather than as individual human beings, but as social beings, so I'm support
we live in this world rather than as individual human beings, but as social beings, so I’m support
goodmorning fron greece…
andreas-pinkfloyd.blogspot.com
goodmorning fron greece…
andreas-pinkfloyd.blogspot.com
Leave the Iranian islamique republic in peace and clean your own dust.
What about if yiou erase your 51 Zionistr state and give back Palestine to its owners ?
Leave the Iranian islamique republic in peace and clean your own dust.
What about if yiou erase your 51 Zionistr state and give back Palestine to its owners ?
A liberdade de expressão é uma faculdade humana e por isso respeito a
liberdade de religião e os direitos humanos.
thank You
A liberdade de expressão é uma faculdade humana e por isso respeito a
liberdade de religião e os direitos humanos.
thank You