Iranian opposition leaders Karroubi (L) and Moussavi (R)

Moussavi and Karroubi were both presidential candidates in the June 2009 election — where critics allege the government committed widespread fraud to keep incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power — and subsequently became public faces of the Green opposition movement that faced a brutal regime crackdown.

In addition to an interactive timeline of the house arrests and a letter-writing campaign aimed at freeing the opposition leaders, ICHRI released this short video about the affair:

In the ICHRI release, the group’s spokesman Hadi Ghaemi said:

Khamenei bears the ultimate responsibility for these house arrests, which indeed are nothing short of a kidnapping. Khamenei is operating above the law of the land, and the intelligence and judicial apparatus are tools of repression in his hands, operating with impunity and without any regard for the law or the constitution.

According the ICHRI, the “house arrests are illegal under both Iranian and international law,” and no Iranian agency or official has taken responsibility.

This week, Iran escalated the war of words into action, with authorities allegedly harassing BBC Persian employees’ family members in Iran and arresting Iranians it accuses of working directly for the channel. A BBC spokesman released a statement last week accusing Iran of arresting the sister of a BBC Persian employee, amid other intimidation. Then news broke from a state-run agency that Iran detained alleged employees of the network inside Iran. The BBC said in a statement that this couldn’t be true because the “Persian language service does not have a presence in Iran. There are no BBC Persian staff members or stringers working inside Iran.” (In its 2010 annual report, the BBC indicated that much of its content from inside Iran comes from “citizen journalism.”)

Rights groups and journalism advocacy outfits chimed in to join the BBC in condemning the Iranian actions. Citing the recent reports as well as the arrests of other journalists and filmmakers, Middle East director of New York-based Human Rights Watch Sarah Leah Whitson said:

The recent wave of arrests, especially against relatives of journalists working abroad, is a reprehensible escalation in the current campaign to stifle freedom of information in Iran. It is a sober reminder of the lengths Iranian authorities will go to control the airwaves, newspapers, and the internet – even if it means ruining the lives of Iranians at home and abroad.

The Committee to Protect Journalists’ Abdel Dayem added:

Iran’s government must immediately stop its harassment of the friends and family members of journalists. These attacks on journalists beyond Iran’s own borders show the lengths to which Tehran will go to intimidate the media into silence and deprive its constituents of information.

The latest accusations traded between the Iranian government and the BBC follow a recently-heightened pattern of the Iranian regime cracking down on journalists and bloggers. The continuing blocking of websites and satellite jamming of outside news channels — including the U.S.-government sponsored VOA Persian Service — led to a protest last month in Geneva outside of a meeting of the U.N. telecommunications agency calling on the group to work to end censorship and jamming in Iran.

The U.N. placed responsibility for the majority of killings squarely on the shoulders of the Taliban and allied anti-government forces, blaming them for more than three quarters of civilian deaths. Here’s a chart from the U.N. report attributing blame for civilian killings in 2010 and 2011, with blue representing anti-government forces’ responsibility and red representing pro-government forces’ responsibility:

Improvised explosive device (IED) attacks, which accounted for 45 percent of anti-government attacks in a six month period in 2011, caused more civilian deaths — 967 total during 2009 through 2011 — than any other tactic used by anti-government forces. But targeted killings, accounting for nearly 500 deaths in that period, and suicide bombings were also on the rise.

Aerial attacks accounted for the most civilian deaths caused by pro-government forces, which include the U.S.-led international coalition there. The U.N. report noted a nine percent uptick from 2010 to 187 such deaths in 2011. Night raids, which international forces continue to carry out over objections by Afghan president Hamid Karzai, saw a 22 percent drop in civilian deaths from 2010, down to just 63 in 2011.

The report paints a bleak picture for Afghan civilians, with injuries from fighting also on the rise. The report said:

As 2011 unfolded, ordinary Afghan people experienced growing intrusion into and disruption of their daily lives by the armed conflict in their country. Conflict and insecurity displaced 185,632 Afghans in 2011, an increase of 45 percent from 2010.

Thousands more Afghans lost their livelihoods and property, were denied access to justice, had their right to freedom of movement restricted or taken away, and had their access to food, health care and education compromised. The unremitting toll of civilian casualties coupled with pervasive intimidation affected many civilians directly, and many more indirectly, by fueling uncertainty, tension and fear.

With the first signs of possible peace talks and an imminent transition from U.S.-led forces to Afghan forces, the U.N. report called for both sides of the conflict to reaffirm and enforce international humanitarian law.

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff

Brazil, a member of a bloc of emerging economies know and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), built a strong trade relationship with Iran and involved itself in Middle East diplomacy under its last president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Lula, as he is widely known, attempted to broker a confidence-building deal between the West and Iran to diffuse tension over the latter’s nuclear program. But the 2010 deal came just as the Obama administration had rallied international support for another round of U.N. Security Council sanctions aimed at the nuclear program. The U.S. objected to Iran’s condition that the sanctions — since shown to be effective in slowing Iran’s progress — be scuttled.

Now, the New York Times reports, a sometime media adviser to Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expressed anger that Iran was also losing Brazil:

After President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran took a four-country tour of Latin America this month, during which he met with several outspoken critics of the United States but was notably not invited to stop in Brazil, one of his top advisers took a public swipe at Brazil’s president, Dilma Rousseff, saying she had “destroyed years of good relations” between the two nations.

“The Brazilian president has been striking against everything that Lula accomplished,” Ali Akbar Javanfekr, who has worked as Mr. Ahmadinejad’s top media adviser, said in an interview published Monday by Folha de São Paulo, a leading Brazilian newspaper, in which he compared Ms. Rousseff to her predecessor and political mentor.

In a New Yorker profile of Brazilian president Rousseff late last year, Nicholas Lemann wrote:

After taking office, Rousseff began to distance herself from Lula’s more exotic foreign-policy initiatives. She declared that, as someone who had been tortured, she had special concerns about a government that tortures, and that would influence Brazil’s diplomatic partnership with Iran.

Indeed, quickly after coming to office, Rousseff supported the Obama administration initiative of a U.N. special rapporteur for human rights in Iran, whose eventual report condemned Iranian rights abuses.

In addition to diplomatic fallout, the Times also noted that Iran’s robust trade relations with Brazil have recently cooled.

The report about the Iranian adviser’s comments on Brazil came on the heels of a report last week that another BRICS country spoke out forcefully against suspected Iranian designs on nuclear weapons. China’s premier Wen Jiabao said that, while trade with Iran would be maintained for the meantime, China “adamantly opposes Iran developing and possessing nuclear weapons.”

Anwer Malek said on Al Jazeera television that Assad’s government was committing “war crimes,” deceiving observes, stocking demonstrations with loyalists and resuming attacks on protesters as soon as observers left a given area. “Therefore,” he said, “I’ve decided to withdraw from this mission.” While the Arab League didn’t comment, the Associated Press reported that Malek, who was listed as an observer, hails from Tunisia and works for the Arab Committee for Human Rights in Paris.

According to a translation dubbed over Malek’s Arabic on Al Jazeera English, the former observer said:

The mission was a farce, and the observers have been fooled. The regime orchestrated it, fabricated most of what we saw to stop the Arab League [from] taking action against the regime. What I saw was a humanitarian disaster. The regime is not just committing one war crime, but a series of crimes against its people.

The regime didn’t meet any of our requests. In fact, they were trying to deceive us and steer us away from what was really happening towards insignificant things. They didn’t withdraw their tanks from the streets; they just hid them and then redeployed them after we left. The snipers are everywhere shooting at civilians. People are being kidnapped. Prisoners are being tortured, and no one is being released. …

I’ve seen snipers on top of buildings. On one, there were even army officers in front fo the building while snipers were on the roof. Some of our team preferred to maintain good relations with the regime and deny that there are snipers.

Watch the video:

Malek said the regime had “gained a lot of time” to carry out its “plan,” and said the regime sent “spies and intelligence officers” to travel with their team as “drivers and minders.” He said: “As soon as we left an area, they attacked people.”

In comment to ICHRI, Nobel laureate and Iranian human rights lawyer Shirin Ebadi put the practice in perspective, ascribing to it a political, and not anti-crime motive:

The Iranian judiciary and government know that the death penalty is not a suitable solution for fighting crime, particularly drug-related crimes. The basic question is this: why does the Iranian government use this type of punishment with such enthusiasm? The issue is that these executions only create fear and intimidation and serve only a political purpose. All of the statistics show that while the number of executions have increased the number of drug-related crimes have not decreased at all.

Iran executed a total of about 600 people in 2011. In 2010, the last year for which comprehensive statistics are available, Amnesty International placed Iran second on the world’s list for putting people to death (PDF). Since 2007, Iran is also second in total executions, only behind China which kills thousands a year and keeps exact figures secret.

In a December report, Amnesty said 81 percent of death penalties in Iran were for drug-related offenses, and called on Iran to stop the executions. The State Department’s country reports on human rights for 2010 also made a prominent issue of executions in Iran, documenting many cases of those sentenced to death, and raising the issue of secret executions:

According to multiple sources, the government executed approximately 312 persons in summary executions during the year, many after trials that were conducted in secret or did not adhere to basic principles of due process.

With the release of the ICHRI report, the group’s head Hadi Ghaemi said: “Iran has shown an inability to use the death penalty in a legal and accountable manner. With skyrocketing execution numbers marred by unfair trials and opaque judicial proceedings, it’s time for Iran to institute a moratorium and join the growing trend towards abolition.”

• Promptly investigate all reported killings and serious incidents of violence, hold perpetrators accountable, and establish systems for recording and reporting such incidents.
• Take measures to prevent torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, investigate all reported incidents of such treatment, and hold those responsible accountable.
• Update asylum laws to protect those fleeing persecution and ensure none are returned to territories where their life or freedom would be threatened.
• Repeal laws criminalizing homosexuality, make sure no other laws can be used to harass or detain people for their identities, and abolish the death penalty for consensual sexual relations.
• Enact comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation that includes protections for sexual orientation and gender identity.
• Ensure freedoms of expression, association, and peaceful assembly without anti-LGBT discrimination.
• Implement training programs for law and safety officials and support public information campaigns to counter homophobia and transphobia.
• Facilitate legal recognition of transgender individuals’ preferred gender on relevant documentation.

These recommendations echo Sec. Hillary Clinton’s comments at the United Nations last week, calling for a worldwide end to the mistreatment of LGBT people.

Earlier this week, a bipartisan group of Middle East experts and leading human rights organizations sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressing their concerns about the ongoing political tensions in Bahrain. The letter urged the U.S. to hold the Bahraini government to its commitments for reform and to encourage constructive participation from the opposition

The impetus for this letter was the much-anticipated report of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) report, released earlier today. The report sought to address the violent events that occurred last February, when hundreds of thousands Bahrainis demonstrated peacefully in support of greater political freedom. Appointed by the King of Bahrain, the Commission was headed by an Egyptian-American professor and made up of independent, internationally recognized scholars and jurists. Despite this diverse group, the Commission still had an uphill battle given the surrounding environment of paranoia and mistrust to conduct its investigations.

In a move welcomed by many Bahrain watchers, the commission, found that the government’s security forces used “unnecessary and excessive force” and that many detainees were subjected to torture. The report effectively confirms the accusations from national and international human rights groups that the government of Bahrain was guilty of systematic human rights violations.

The response from the Bahraini government is notable, with a spokesman commenting that, “The government welcomes the findings of the Independent Commission, and acknowledges its criticisms.” However, many of the BICI recommendations center around the need for institutional change in Bahrain’s legal framework — a complex and potentially lengthy process. Indeed, as the report notes, the “systematic pattern of behavior…indicates that this [use of excessive force] is how these security forces were trained and were expected to behave.” Specific, concrete recommendations for changing these structural problems — and a willingness to implement them — are vital for any real progress to occur.

Given the unrest throughout the broader Middle East, the Commission’s report has gained international significance, including for many law and policymakers in Washington, who have walked a careful line in dealing with the Bahraini government over the last few months. As ThinkProgress reported last September, the administration came under pressure from rights groups for approving a $53 million arms package to Bahrain, seemingly ignoring the crackdown on protesters. Bahrain has been a critical ally of the United States in the Middle East and the island serves as the headquarters for the U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and the Fifth Fleet.

Notably, the report makes no attempt to whitewash the government’s abuses. Its recommendations largely mirror those in the letter to Secretary Clinton, which is certainly an encouraging sign. But leaders from the Bahraini opposition expressed concern that the Commission’s findings would not lead to reconciliation unless it faulted senior officials. On this front, the report is less encouraging, as it merely calls for the establishment of a “national independent and impartial mechanism” to determine the accountability of specific individuals responsible for the abuses.

Many opposition leaders and human rights groups have taken a cautious stance, and rightly so. The report could be a positive step toward reconciliation, but whether the Bahraini government will implement the recommendations, however, remains in question.

As for U.S.-Bahraini partnership, the State Department has said it will “review the Commission’s findings carefully and assess the Government of Bahrain’s efforts to implement the recommendations and make needed reforms.” This is particularly important given the $53 million arms sale that was suspended, pending the report’s findings. Equally critical, however, and looking more long-term, is the chance this report affords the Bahraini government to turn the corner on the country’s growing political unrest. And given the recent fate of other governments in the region who have been reluctant to reform, that’s an opportunity they might want to make good on — as soon as they possibly can.

In reality, as human rights groups have long documented, the LRA is a murderous “death cult,” best known for descending on villages, “capturing, killing, and abducting hundreds of civilians,” and forcing boys to become child soldiers and girls to become “bush wives.”

Many journalists and human rights advocates — along with an LRA survivor — have responded to Limbaugh, but yesterday he received a rebuke from the Senate floor from someone who called the controversial radio host “my good friend Rush Limbaugh.”

Using Limbaugh’s and his cohorts name, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), said, “some people have mistakenly said that [the LRA's leader] is a Christian, and I want to make sure everyone knows that he was officially disavowed by the Catholic Church in Uganda.” He went on to detail their group’s atrocities.

It’s unusual for any senator to call out an ideological ally by name from the Senate floor, but even more so considering that Inhofe has in the past looked past egregious human rights violations to lend support for Christian leaders. In April, Inhofe defended former Ivory Coast dictator Laurent Gbagbo after other African and international leaders condemned him for taking up arms to retain power after losing the election to a Muslim rival. But the LRA is terrible enough for even Inhofe to reject.

Today, Limabugh responded to Inhofe on his radio show, admitting he was “misinformed” about the LRA. But Limbaugh seemed more bemused about having his name “entered into the Congressional record” than apologetic, giving a hearty laugh about it before quickly moving on to another topic.

• The Penal Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran criminalizes all homosexual acts and actively punishes certain homosexual acts with death.
• Individuals perceived to have committed homosexual acts are subjected to arbitrary arrest, torture in state custody, and denial of the right to a fair trial.
• Iranian authorities at the highest levels have repeatedly issued homophobic statements that amount to incitement to discrimination and violence.

Although the U.N. has regularly addresses LGBT rights when investigating the state of human rights, Iran has refused to report on them, arguing that they are “beyond the mandate and subject matter of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently condemned homosexuality as “an ugly deed… shameful… one of the ugliest behaviours in our society (that is) against the divine teachings of every faith,” having previously said there are no homosexuals in his country. On Facebook, however, LGBT Iranians are making themselves known.

Israeli settler and policeman attacks an activist (photo: Activestills)

Later that evening, the activists returned to Anatot and again, the Israeli settlers met them with more violence and again, the police did nothing to prevent the attacks, +972 reported:

Later in the day, more activists arrived to protest against the violence that took place earlier. They too were attacked and beaten and had stones thrown at them. In spite of police presence at the scene, the police did nothing.

Nineteen people were injured in the second attack, requiring medical attention, and three have been hospitalized. A total of 23 injuries were reported from this incident, and according to the twitter feed of a female activist who was there, settlers tried to rip her clothes off. There was also damage done to cars belonging to the activists, which were parked outside the settlement – smashed windshields, head and tail lights, and punctured tires.

Activists caught the attacks on video:

+972′s Yossi Gurvitz reported that one of the settlers that attacked the activists was actually a police officer. Eyal Raz, an activist in the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity movement, wrote of the scene in Haaretz:

[The Anatot settlers] came to destroy, to break, perhaps even to kill. They used their hands, their fists and their teeth, along with stones, pipes and knives. They aimed for the photographers, the women, for the young and the old alike. They brought individuals down to the ground and assaulted them as they lay there, surrounded. They pounced on the hindmost of those trying to flee as they pursued their battered victims.

And Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity leader Sara Benninga said that while she has shrugged off previous experiences of harassment from authorities, her “perception changed” because of this incident:

Up until now, when I had experienced expressions of hate and violence from my surroundings, from policemen at demonstrations or from passersby on the street, I didn’t honestly believe that the whole system was against me. … [but] when policemen in uniform stand and quietly watch a violent and brutal crowd of about 200 people beat up a group of 50 people, the illusion of a rescuing justice is shattered.

But what’s also striking about the events in Anadot last Friday is that they are receiving scant media attention, particularly in Israel. Assaf Sharon, also affiliated with the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity movement, suffered a broken nose from the violence. “I took quite a beating,” Sharon told ThinkProgress in an email, “I must confess that the pain of the blows and wounds dulls in comparison with the frustration from the silence and indifference with which this unprecedented event is being received.”