Cutting off a Thief’s Hands

The hands of five young individuals who are said to be thieves were cut off in the city of Hamedan last week. A man whose words appeared more like those of a blood thirsty criminal but in fact has the title of Prosecutor for the city of Hamedan and who calls himself Biglari rationalized the act whose execution he had signed in these words:

“The live-giving school of Shiite provides dignity for mankind and respects the rights of citizens. Because of this, it does not prescribe cutting hands for every thief, but has 16 conditions that must be met for this.”

Biglari then listed the conditions and five young Iranians who are mostly younger than 25 years of age qualify to have their hands cut off also said, “One condition is that the stolen good must have a private owner and the other is that the thief had to have violated the protective barrier. The protective barrier is something that the owner sets up for his property to safeguard it against thieves.”

These two conditions that Biglari highlighted to cut off the hands of the thieves are in fact present among official thieves of the Iranian regime, the very same regime that has given him the judiciary title through which he exercises his butchery. A person who has been selected by thieves and acts on their orders cannot take the position of an independent and impartial judge and protect the life, property or dignity of citizens and respect human dignity and self-esteem.

We know that the natural resources of Iran belong to the Iranian people just as we know that these have been usurped by regime individuals and groups who portray themselves to be the protectors of the “life-giving” school of Shiism. One does not have to go far to show or prove that the regime has the public’s resources. The head of Iran’s Majlis, Larijani, who has nothing to do with the legal or illegal opposition and himself is among the regime culprits, had cried in protests that the president and his colleagues ignore the head of the Majlis, ridicule the supervisory powers of parliament, disregard Majlis’ laws and resolutions, implements the government’s provisions without Majlis’ approval contrary to the constitution and engages in many other similar actions which when listened to make it clear that the property and natural resources of the Iranian nation are in fact usurped by powerful thieves whose hands are not cut off. This property has the ‘protective barrier’ that Biglari mentions, which is supposed to be the constitution. The thieves have broken into this barrier and have stolen the property. So, based on the same Shiite humanity saving school that Biglari uses to cut of the hands of the young, unemployed, deprived and hungry Iranians, the hands of the thieves who have stolen the property of the people and broken the property barrier, which is the law, must be cut off from this country and nation.

Furthermore, as a reminder of the historic measure a few years ago through which the Guardians Council together with the State Expediency Council removed the supervision of foundations and institutions under the command of the leader from Majlis’ jurisdiction and investigations also translates into that these two institutions blatantly in broad daylight broke the ‘protective barrier’ (i.e. the constitution). The Iranian had thought that they had succeeded in safeguarding, or in the religious term put it under a protective barrier and believed that they had protected it legally from the invasion of thieves. According to one provision under law, the hands of a person who breaks into this barrier must be cut. The act of plundering the wealth of the Iranian people has taken place, the thieves have broken the barrier and have been identified. So why are they not punished? Has the humanity saving school of Shiism given permission to Biglari and his accomplices to apply the 16 criteria against the poor, youth, the unemployed, the homeless and those under the subjugation of government thieves and at the same time ignore that their own long hands have clenched against the Iranian people and have broken the barriers and usurped the oil and gas in this land? If the regime had not plundered, then the five Iranian youth would have had a decent human life, job, welfare and social security. And most importantly they would have had their hands.

After Biglari ordered the butchers to amputate the hands of the five Iranian youth with a saber, then began to issue justifications and as an effort to clear his stained hands said, “When a hand gets used to stealing and results in public suffering, it must be shortened.” He added that the purpose of this was to “punish the thief and teach a lesson to others.” Finally, he acts condescendingly and says that the cutting of the hands was not done in public because, “global imperialism (a term usually to mean the US) takes misuses the execution of these decrees in public and claims that human rights are not respected in Iran.”

When one puts all of Biglari’s utterances together, we come to learn of the a criminal who is attacking the Iranian nation and while amputating the body of the deprived Iranian people, and at the same time does not hide his fear of ‘global imperialism’ and wonders why ‘criminals’ air allegations against humanity and call them (i.e. the butchers) to be violators of human rights.

Iranian youth whose hands are cut on charges of being thieves, are in fact stealing because of deprivation. When a regime does not use the assets and property of a nation to create jobs and government importers act against domestic non-government producers, the conditions for a large part of the population are those of scarcity. Biglari himself concedes that in a year of scarcity one cannot cut the hands of a thief. One of the 16 criteria that Biglari mentions that is necessary to cut a thief’s hand is that the theft should not have taken place at a time of scarcity. Biglari knows better than others that for a large part of the Iranian youth we are in a period of scarcity and so long as the key and natural resources of their country are in the hands of occupying thieves, they will continue to remain deprived and live under scarce conditions. If a theft is not committed through the use of arms but out of need, particularly in a land where government thieves are busy plundering the wealth of the country, the act is not absolute and if the government desires to remove the injustice and suffering of the deprived on the basis of religious standards, it has the duty of interpreting the humanity saving school in a way that provides the youth bread, water, housing and education. Let’s not even talk abut what some of their own kind have said which is that not only should the hands of a thief not be cut in the time of scarcity and when the regime is cruel, but that until the appearance of the 12th imam such punishment and others (i.e. Islamic retribution) is forbidden and has no Shiite justification.

These remarks and quotes will not return the hands of the five youth that have been cut. They are a warning to Biglari and his accomplices to fear the consequences of their own acts as they have proven through their deeds that they do not believe in the day of judgment as they amputate the body of people. They should be thinking of the retribution that awaits them in this world and which is close and serious.