Rights groups warn of Tehran regime’s increasing use of executions to suppress dissent, with at least 600 this year

Human rights groups have raised the alarm over the growing number of death sentences and executions in Iran, after reports that a 23-year-old woman, Najmeh Amini, has been sentenced to death for blasphemy over a social-media post.

Amini, an accounting student, is being held in Vakilabad prison in the north-east city of Mashhad. She has been sentenced to more than 12 years in prison and death in separate cases heard by a revolutionary and a criminal court.

A source close to Amini’s family told the US-based Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI) that Amini was sentenced to death on charges of “sab ol-nabi” (insulting the prophet). She was reportedly arrested following online monitoring by Iran’s Cyber Police (Fata). The exact content of her posts has not been publicly disclosed.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 147 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (22 children)

Imagine living in a country of mental patients where if you insult their favorite storybook character, they have this burning urge to kill you. It’s manic obsession.

What kind of profit prophet wants people to die in their name for an insult?

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 weeks ago

    What kind of profit wants people to die in their name for an insult?

    The normal kind of prophet. People who have voices in their head and start a cult kind of have an inflated idea of their own importance. It's like their whole thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children)

    Imagine living in a country of mental patients where if you insult their favorite storybook character, they have this burning urge to kill you.

    Nervous anti-Harry Potter noises

    What kind of profit wants people to die in their name for an insult?

    We're seven levels deeper than "What did the Prophet literally want you to do?" Because a lot of this is seen as a very secular form of treason, subversion, or other form of espionage. Iranians are deeply paranoid, particularly of "Western" influences, because the state leadership believes it is used to cultivate double-agents for the purpose of sabotage or counter-revolution.

    In some sense, it's like walking into an airport with a big t-shirt that reads "Dis Guys Da Bomb!" and getting tackled by security. The thing they're responding to isn't a banal fashion choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 3 weeks ago (10 children)

    The USA is only a half step behind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 3 weeks ago (9 children)

    Half a step? We're all set to do public executions, idk about half step, maybe a goose step...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

    Comparing the execution of Nidal to this woman is a little strange. I'm not advocating for public executions, at least I hope that's obvious, but to claim they're even remotely similar is an extreme exaggeration.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Their crimes aren't comparable, but the regimes' actions are.

    Nidal may not be being executed for blasphemy/speaking out, but people in the US are absolutely being targeted for their beliefs and political leanings (on top of the classic skin color based arrests). Some are jailed, some are charged and released but still have to deal with the process, illegal deportations, and others are just disappeared outright.

    That part is hardly an exaggeration.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago*

    Let's be clear, I'm not advocating for the Trump admin. That being said, there's a wide berth between the actions of the current administration/U.S. and Iran's. For one thing, many people in the U.S. aren't simply going along with what the admin is doing and while people have died, we aren't talking about ICE opening fire into crowds of protestors. The IRGC is not like this, they just kill people for whatever reason they want it seems (including blasphemy apparently).

    We aren't there yet. Whether we reach that point remains to be seen, but the execution of a terrorist who killed 13 people and wounded (I think) 32 others is vastly different from killing women for speaking blasphemy.

    Again, I'm not advocating for public executions or even Nidal's execution - I think he's already in a living hell of his own making and to make him a martyr would be fulfilling his wishes. I am of the opinion we should not do that, and I'm also of the opinion that this is the crueler option. Shit's complicated, yo.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (3 children)

    they're clearly similar, I don't even think the word remotely is necessary. The State shouldn't be executing people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children)

    They are not similar, executing a man for killing 13 people including a pregnant woman and injuring (at least) 32 other people is infinitely more justifiable than executing someone for blasphemy. It's actually amazing he wasn't killed already, regardless of how you feel about the execution - which I'm against.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I agree with your comments here. It's refreshing to see some semblance of reason on forums/social media. Concerns me with how these venues have become inundated with radical and low brow content. I see it across the political spectrum. Been using forums since the late 90s. Up until the mid-2010s I'd argue there was much much more reasonable discussion to be found. I don't doubt the proportional rise in bots have some play in it. Seems these places of discussion have become nothing more than a plot to sow hate and propaganda within our society. I miss the days when the vast majority of the population thought it silly to participate on these internet places.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    People are much, much angrier and feel more betrayed than they did in the 2000's to 20-teens. I was under the impression that everyone got the message that conservatives were knuckle dragging, inbred troglodytes that should never be given power after Bush happened. Lo, and behold - Trump happened because these same knuckle dragging inbreds didn't learn their lesson. The anger I feel towards conservative people is overwhelming, some of my darkest and most hateful thoughts are centered around them. I'm close to viewing them as subhuman.

    All of this to say, things have changed. People aren't willing to believe American bullshit anymore, and rightly so. That doesn't mean we've become a place that executes people for blasphemy. We need to be level headed and clear eyed if we're ever going to make it out of this fucking mess.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 53 points 3 weeks ago (34 children)

    Does anyone know what she actually said?

  • source
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

    Apparently, she insulted Muhammed or Allah.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    they can't say it or risk execution themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -15 points 3 weeks ago (20 children)

    100% participated in violent riots but TheGuardian has Zionist propaganda to push

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (14 children)

    To be fair Guardian was one of the few (maybe only) main stream media outlets that had regular articles on Gaza calling it a genocide/ethnic cleansing/war crime. It wasn't ofcourse an editorial stand point but they allowed their writers to express this opinion. BBC on the other hand is a different story...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (13 children)

    TheGuardian had regular articles condemning the Green party for their Zionism is racism motion.

    TheGuardian has regular articles vouching for debunking Israeli rape hoax propaganda.

    TheGuardian is a Zionist stronghold occasionally allowing some Liberal dissent

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (12 children)

    Zionist strongholds aren't known for allowing occasional Liberel dissent, especially when it comes to calling what they do genocide. They are more the "kill now ask questions later" type. But yeah I did see the second article you mentioned, not the first one though. By numbers however I believe anti-zionist articles would far outweight zionist ones. Not that having even one is okay but still if I would call a place zionist den, it would be BBC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)

    Zionist strongholds aren’t known for allowing occasional Liberel dissent,

    They are it is called Liberal Zionism. They will allow dissent of Israeli policies but never the existence of Israel itself.

    This Zionist cartoon was on their frontpage shortly after the vote https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2026/oct/07/ella-baron-greens-new-zionism-is-racism-policy-cartoon

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (10 children)

    Yeah that cartoon sucks and conflates zionism with Jews which is stupid (and degrading for non zionist Jews actually). But when it comes to calling Gazan genocide a genocide it is still Zionists' tender spot. They are suing academicians, journalists all over the world for less so I still wouldn't call it a stronghold. I wouldn't even call it an editorial stance (for the same reason I don't call anti zionism their editorial stance because they publish articles calling the genocide a genocide). Here are some examples from me

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/06/we-are-witnessing-the-final-stage-of-genocide-in-gaza

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/21/omer-bartov-israel-zionism-genocide

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/01/leaked-gaza-riviera-plan-dismissed-as-insane-attempt-to-cover-ethnic-cleansing

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/oct/01/new-google-maps-images-reveal-massive-scale-of-devastation-in-gaza

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/07/israeli-minister-reveals-plan-to-force-population-of-gaza-into-camp-on-ruins-of-rafah

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/mar/23/israel-gaza-war-crimes-guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/09/the-gaza-family-torn-apart-by-idf-snipers-from-chicago-and-munich

    https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/07/ten-britons-accused-of-committing-war-crimes-while-fighting-for-israel-in-gaza

    I also I don't expect them to debate the existence of Israel. You may study it historically and conclude that it was a mistake for them to try to force their existence in middle east back then, but the fact of the matter is there is an Israel now. Anything that goes along the lines of "they shouldn't exist there" is trading one genocide for another one so it would be not only unreasonable to expect a respectable media outlet to defend that position, inhumane too. What is required is harsh accountability for everything that zionists and state of Israel has done in Gaza, a cleansing of world politics from zionist influence and burying their public image into the ground so that at least the next generation doesn't follow in their footsteps.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Most people mean a democratic single state with equal rights for everyone living on the land when talking about Israel not existing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    That I am on board with in theory though in practice I find it hard to be realized in a short time after decades of zionist propaganda against Islam. So if we are ever going to go there, we need to start by holding zionists and state of Israel heavily accountable for what they did and still are doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 weeks ago* (7 children)

    Your examples are some opinion pieces to cleanse TheGuardian of having to do actual journalism. Opinion pieces are not representative of TheGuardians editorial board or their journalists. They mean nothing.

    This is the pro-genocide blood libel propaganda TheGuardian has spread using their own name at the height of the genocide to manufacture consent for Israel:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/evidence-points-to-systematic-use-of-rape-by-hamas-in-7-october-attacks

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

    One, not all of them are opinion pieces,

    Two, even after being able to list tens of articles I specifically said this still DOESN'T mean this is their editorial stance point despite you claiming that their editorial stance point is pro zionism only after showing two articles. Something doesn't add up here. Also fuck Hamas by the way, I don't know if that article reflects anything truthful but Hamas is a terrorist organization and just like genocide, it should be condemned. I understand the urge to hurt the other side after decades of opression and genocide but still won't side with killing civilians as a rational person. I can't condemn them for all this. If I saw my kid get blown to pieces I would probably join them too. But it doesn't mean I see them as the solution to this ongoing genocide or that I would expect a mainstream media to completely side with them. It is unrealistic and unreasonable. Not to mention Hamas was a actually supported by Israel for a long time so supporting Hamas is kind of cyclic. They are likely infiltrated by Israeli agents (of Palestinian origin) and being used as puppets in this opression to create casus belli for Israel.

    Three, being able to release REGULAR opinion pieces about genocide and actual articles about the extent of destruction going in in Gaza is much more than any mainstream western media is doing right now. And I believe this has had positive impact on regular pro palestine marches in the UK some of which reached to almost half a million in attendance. Stop with this "anyone who doesn't do stuff exactly the way I want them to is a Zionist" rhetoric, doesn't help you, doesn't help anyone and makes you look like a bot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    Also fuck Hamas by the way, I don’t know if that article reflects anything truthful but Hamas is a terrorist organization

    I understand so you are a Zionist. Now I see why you support TheGuardians Zionist propaganda goodbye.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

    Goodbye

    Sorry before you go, here is a fact about your favourite independence fighters

    The Israeli government has been involved in assisting or empowering the Palestinian political and military organization Hamas at various points in its history.[a] This support continued during and in spite of active military hostilities between the two sides.

    But ofcourse for you wikipedia is also a Zionist organization (that somehow holds the Israeli state accountable for double dealing and genocide but where you go logic does not seem to follow so that is ok).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

    You accuse other news sources of being zionist propaganda and then show me an article who quotes pro-Hamas scholars. But anyway I will humor you.

    The only thing this article probably accurately portrays is how Hamas originated, not how it evolved. This article can only reliably refute that Israel did not create Hamas, which also is not really my claim or the majority of wikipedia article's claim (although it does cite interviews from some Israeli officials claiming this, that is not really any proof). Empowering is not the same thing as creating. Somehow this article glosses over some of the more tangible evidences that this claim is built upon like how the Israeli military doing nothing in the 1980 riots despite them being quite trigger happy at the slightest commotion. Israel quite often stood by when the fundamentalists battled more pro-secular wings which under normal stances would be something contrary to a state which wants to "root out Islamism" from their neighborhood.

    The article also says that Zionists are spreading these rumors as a cudgel to keep Nethanyahu in check, which funny enough only makes sense if there is some truth behind it so that it can actually be used as blackmail. So that makes me believe that Israeli state supported Hamas even more. You can also have a look at this related article if you are actually reading anything I am putting here

    That article quoting pro-hamas scholars as evidence is the same as me quoting a nationalist Israel news article as a source. Atleast I try to keep my sources varied. Also I am sure you can see the circular logic in calling the act of accusing Israel of actually funding instability in the region and using that as a casus belli for genocide a "Hasbara". How does that even help Israel? Israel has been using all its PR apparatus to convince the rest of the world that they are the "good guys", this goes completely against that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child)

    Even if it's true, "My noble protests" vs "their violent riots." What ever could she be protesting? I'm sure you'll tell me the CIA is behind it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)
  • [–] -2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    getting rowdy on some property in protest of the state.

    This is the nonsense people say about violent rioters armed by the US and Israel with shotguns after they read TheGuardian

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    The onus is on the state not to kill people, not the people not to act up.

    If the state starts executing political dissidents, it creates more political dissidents.

    You cannot scare people into being how you want, en masse, forever.

    It never works.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 3 weeks ago*

    Yes. That is why Iran is currently united and people are not rioting to protect a few Zionist funded and armed terrorists.

    That is why there was no uprising no matter how much propaganda NATO think-tanks spread. Because the people in Iran are not discontent with their government but with Western aggression against them.

    Reza Pahlavi is a fraud.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 54 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    This is conservatism. Conservatives will always naturally push toward violent authoritarianism. Always.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    That's being religious. Being conservative in this case means being religious, but it's not inherently the same

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    So there's are religious full who manage to be more about peace and goodwill to others.

    Conversely, nothing about Musk or Trump is rooted in any religion.

    However, religion is very useful for authoritarians to sucker the masses to believe there is some higher power that should somehow be considered on the side of the authoritarians.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    It's ok. Trump to the rescue. That regime change should be coming any day now.

    Any day....

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child)

    Yeah if anything it quenched the rebellions more than it did the goverment's opression as people are now more afraid of their lives then they were even before. For the government it was more a handover than a regime change. Thanks Trump for helping government of Iran I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 86 points 3 weeks ago (30 children)
  • [+] 53 points 3 weeks ago* (26 children)
  • [–] 43 points 3 weeks ago* (8 children)

    I'm not rooting for Iran, but after we murdered hundreds of school children on like day fucking 2, I have been rooting against the US.

    If there is a way we can lose without Iran winning, then that would be ideal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 3 weeks ago

    Exactly. Rooting for the people of Iran doesn't make one a tankie. Being against US military intervention should mean being against US military intervention. One can be "rooting" against the US and still be rooting for the freedom of Iranians. Most of this fundamentalism is historically rooted in US interventionism in the first place! Destabilizing the country yet again will not help the women of Iran.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (3 children)

    Only way is to vote Democrat.

    It should come as no surprise that Iran is actually strengthened by the actions of this administration in practically every way. And sure as fuck Harris wouldn't have started Epstein Fury but instead carried on the legacy of her predecessor's JCPOA.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    Dronama bombed west Asia too, and he did impose sanctions on us.

    Fuck your Republicans and Democrats. Rather see both go to hell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (1 child)

    lol Trump has more civilian casualties under his belt than Biden and Obama combined. Not counting the previous Republican Bush administration.

    Your false equivalence fallacy falls flat and any blood past that differential is on the hands of those who wrongly assert "Muh Both Sides!"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 3 weeks ago*

    Putting aside the tankies, I think a lot of people are just rooting for Iran because they want to see Trump's stupidity blow up in his face. It's not really about wanting Iran to win so much as it is about wanting the US to lose, because that kind of arrogance and belligerence deserves a downfall.

    And, of course, there are plenty of people who are rooting for Iran because the Iranian people are already struggling under an oppressive government and don't deserve to then get bombed into the stone age by an angry, insecure man who just wants to make his dick feel big. Rooting for Iran and rooting for the Iranian government are not actually the same thing after all.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 3 weeks ago*

    Is it okay to think the regime in Iran is bad, but still root for them in the war because they are the underdog, and were seemingly behaving under the Obama era agreement?

    And then be worried because now the Iranian regime will probably end up getting nukes, and that will mess with the power balance in the region/world.

    And think that it's not all bad that the world can end up being forced to ditch fossil fuel because of this war.

    And then think Iran are assholes for supplying drones and other stuff to Russia.

    It's complicated when so many things (mostly bad) are happening.

    Edit: I forgot to add the worry that this war can end up triggering WW3.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 weeks ago* (6 children)

    So you would rather Iran loses to the US and instead of being able to follow the path of self-determination, they become a brutal puppet of the US?

    Because that’s what supporting Iran means, it doesn’t mean you agree with their government. It means you want Iran to win it’s defense against America and for the people to rebuild their lives.

    Prior to the US’ unprovoked attack, Iran was in the midst of massive societal upheaval and liberalisation. That has now been sidelined for decades as military and theocratic hardliners have all the pretext to force their will onto the people in the name of national security.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children)

    I thought quokk was an anarchist instance. Hmm.

    See, supporting Iran's right to self determination and wishing them the best in kicking the teeth out of the hegemon's mouth is only half the equation from the anarchist POV.

    Only tankies would leave it at that.

    Condemning stupid hierarchical bullshit masquerading as religious freedom such as this though, should be pretty easy.

    This situation is probably going to be the best and most poignant example today of why we proclaim "No Gods, no masters".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    Being an anarchist does not mean I don’t want a country to stop being attacked by another. It’s also why I want Ukraine to win against Russian imperialism.

    If people are not in a state of war started by another nation, they are more capable of focusing on internal change of which the Iranians were literally doing before the US stopped that.

  • source
  • parent
  • Anarchists are braindead liberals anyway. Scratch an anarchist and a screaming lib comes out.

    I'm Iranian and I don't care about your support, whether you support us or not we will prevail, the stain that you are two siding an imperialistic aggression will remain though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    True.

    So anyways, are you going to tune in for the live execution we have coming up?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 weeks ago* (1 child)

    Even though Hegseth is a fucking moron, nobody's getting executed for saying that Hegseth is a fucking moron. They are executing murderers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    I agree. If the state says they are guilty, they most definitely are. We shouldn’t question the law. Just like in this case where it is obviously known by all that the guilty party is guilty. They will always only do this to those who deserve it.

    The government would never say, make up charges against a political enemy to start searching her home.

    God bless the freest country of all, America.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago

    According to the Iranian newspaper Khorasan, which confirmed the judicial proceedings, Amini told the court she had posted the remarks while hallucinating after taking psychedelic mushrooms with friends and her defence argued it was a “slip of the tongue”.

    The presiding judge rejected her defence, reportedly asking: “Why, in that same hallucinatory state, did you not insult other individuals or opponents of the regime, such as America and Israel?”

    Amini’s death sentence is not final and remains subject to appeal before Iran’s supreme court.

    Good news here is that the ruling remains subject to appeal.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›