Iran eyes badges for Jews
Law would require non-Muslim insignia
Chris Wattie
National Post
Friday, May 19, 2006
Human rights groups are raising alarms over a new law passed by the Iranian parliament that would require the country's Jews and Christians to wear coloured badges to identify them and other religious minorities as non-Muslims.
"This is reminiscent of the Holocaust," said Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. "Iran is moving closer and closer to the ideology of the Nazis."
Iranian expatriates living in Canada yesterday confirmed reports that the Iranian parliament, called the Islamic Majlis, passed a law this week setting a dress code for all Iranians, requiring them to wear almost identical "standard Islamic garments."
The law, which must still be approved by Iran's "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenehi before being put into effect, also establishes special insignia to be worn by non-Muslims.
Iran's roughly 25,000 Jews would have to sew a yellow strip of cloth on the front of their clothes, while Christians would wear red badges and Zoroastrians would be forced to wear blue cloth.
"There's no reason to believe they won't pass this," said Rabbi Hier. "It will certainly pass unless there's some sort of international outcry over this."
Bernie Farber, the chief executive of the Canadian Jewish Congress, said he was "stunned" by the measure. "We thought this had gone the way of the dodo bird, but clearly in Iran everything old and bad is new again," he said. "It's state-sponsored religious discrimination."
Ali Behroozian, an Iranian exile living in Toronto, said the law could come into force as early as next year.
It would make religious minorities immediately identifiable and allow Muslims to avoid contact with non-Muslims.
Mr. Behroozian said it will make life even more difficult for Iran's small pockets of Jewish, Christian and other religious minorities -- the country is overwhelmingly Shi'ite Muslim. "They have all been persecuted for a while, but these new dress rules are going to make things worse for them," he said.
The new law was drafted two years ago, but was stuck in the Iranian parliament until recently when it was revived at the behest of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
A spokesman for the Iranian Embassy in Ottawa refused to comment on the measures. "This is nothing to do with anything here," said a press secretary who identified himself as Mr. Gharmani.
"We are not here to answer such questions."
The Simon Wiesenthal Centre has written to Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, protesting the Iranian law and calling on the international community to bring pressure on Iran to drop the measure.
"The world should not ignore this," said Rabbi Hier. "The world ignored Hitler for many years -- he was dismissed as a demagogue, they said he'd never come to power -- and we were all wrong."
Mr. Farber said Canada and other nations should take action to isolate Mr. Ahmadinejad in light of the new law, which he called "chilling," and his previous string of anti-Semitic statements.
"There are some very frightening parallels here," he said. "It's time to start considering how we're going to deal with this person."
Mr. Ahmadinejad has repeatedly described the Holocaust as a myth and earlier this year announced Iran would host a conference to re-examine the history of the Nazis' "Final Solution."
He has caused international outrage by publicly calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
Iran does not yet have nuclear weapons, but Tehran believed by Western nations to be developing its own nuclear military capability, in defiance of international protocols and peace treaties.
The United States, France and Israel accuse Iran of using a civilian nuclear program to secretly build a weapon. Iran denies this, saying its program is confined to generating electricity.
[email protected]
© National Post 2006
---------------------------------------
To funtime, the "X"-spurt, and the rest of the "Blame the Jew" crew: Time to go and get that swastika tattoo'ed on your foreheads like good little swine-fucking hatemongers.
NEVER AGAIN
Considering however that the Arabs all wear garlic as cologne it does seem to balance out.
towards eliminating the sort of shit they are pushing.
such a threat that they justify what intervention?
Or, should we leave them as roadmarkers of insanity?
and find out if a story is even true. The funny thing is that even the person saying it's true says the law was passed two years ago so why the outrage now. It's another attempt to gin up a new war.
1. Sorry, no matter what YOU'D LIKE to believe, or have convinced yourself of, I take no pleasure in this -- but I'm sure you actually know this already.
2. All non-Muslims Doc, or is your interest in this unable to extent to the Xtians effected by this as well? I mean, THAT wouldn't speak well of you, would it?
3. As someone else points out, Iranians are not Arabs. In fact, they're believed to be descended from the Indo-European group known as [cue ominous music] the Aryans [but NOT THOSE Aryans] [kill ominous music].
4. Perhaps this possible turn of events will give pause to that small segment of the Israeli political elite who has been very happy to quietly support the Iranians in their various and sundry activities, and usually those that result in heightened Iranian-Arab ethnic conflict?
5. At the end of he day/month/year/decade, this, possibly like the Iranian nuclear threat, might turn out to be just... Noticed that the legislation was drafted two years ago, but only now is publicized? And at such a sensitive time? Notice how this "works" to generate "sympathy" for the Jewish population of Israel, and by extension for the policies of Israel? I mean, if I didn't know better, I'd suspect some Mossad manipulation here, but we all know that's NOT POSSIBLE. After all, the Israelis would NEVER try to bamboozle the US. I mean, the thought is inconceivable!!! I'm no fan of African-American urban popular culture, but the homeboys sometimes are on to something when they say "don't believe the hype."
6. Again, your continued efforts to link me to funtime69. What's the mater, do all goyim post alike to you Doc?
7. Conspicuous by its absence is your on-and-off calls for civility on the Board. Or only civility when the post is matter of indifference to you? Wait, I know -- you're paraphrasing one of your idols, Barry Goldwater : "extremism in the defense of Israeli wrongdoing is no vice. Moderation in the defense of Israeli wrongdoing is no virtue"?
8. I don't blame the Jews for everything, as much as you and a few others would like to believe. I do blame the Jews [Israeli branch] for actions inconsistent with their so-called highest ideals [whatever those are] and their total disregard for the welfare of the US [which after all, pays the freight for that tediously melodramatic and cosmically overrated country -- you'd think after all this time US policymakers would try to get a better return on our investment?] with all their desperate and precipitate actions in their corner of the world. And I do blame Jews [US branch] when they uncritically and automatically support every word and deed of the Israeli gov't. Which seems IMHO to be pretty much most of the time. Sound like anyone we know Doc?
9. Maybe you and Riem and a few other are right -- I'm just a hate-filled gentile expressing his limited and malignant thought processes under the cover of anti-Zionism? But I'm not able to pull the wool over your uber-discerning eyes, alas.
10. Still hope you're enjoy the monster cycle.
-- Modified on 5/20/2006 1:11:34 AM
But it goes nowhere. No article.
Did a major search on Google....nothing.
Has this story been confirmed or is it a gag?
as long as it provides DoctorGonzo with a chance to vent.
In the general scheme of this board:
DocGonzo=liberal - XiaomingLover=conservative
In the general scheme of political correctness:
liberal=pro Palestinian/Muslim - conservative=pro Israeli/anti-terrorist
So what am I missing?
-- Modified on 5/19/2006 8:24:33 PM
No, I'm pretty moderate in most things. But I do have this minority opinion re the Israeli-Palestian conflict and the US stake in it.
How about ? :
Pro - Israel -- overwhelmingly and overbearingly dominant ;
Pro - Palestinian -- holding our tounges [mostly] and endlessly dodging accusations of anti-Semitism?
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61688.htm
They claim the Iranians incite anti-semitism, but we already know the State Dept is full of Jews, and Mexicans, and all the rest of those faggots, so we don't have to deal with those allegations.
Only one good thing a Mexican ever said was, "we don't need no stinking (put your shit here)".
You are talking about Iran, Muslims, and Arabs, but you just lost being over patriotic. I think you are just being anti-Muslim and anti-Arab, which also equals anti-Semite. If you have some intellectual thought you'd recognize that Arabs and Jews are Semites. Now to my main point, Israel uses license plates that are based on race. If you're Israeli you get a yellow one. If you're Palestinian you get a blue one. So what is the difference between badges on Jews in Iran and blue license plates for Palestinians? It's all the same: racist leaders run the show. Thus, if you disagree with me you ought to be racist and Anti-Arab, which is anti-Semite. Therefore, you realize that you hate yourself Mr. Doc.
"The actual legislation passed by the Iranian parliament regulates women's fashion, and urges the establishment of a national fashion house that would make Islamically appropriate clothing. There is a vogue for "Islamic chic" among many middle class Iranian women that involves, for instance, wearing expensive boots that cover the legs and so, it is argued, are permitted under Iranian law. The scruffy, puritanical Ahmadinejad and his backers among the hardliners in parliament are waging a new and probably doomed struggle against the young Iranian fashionistas. (The Khomeinists give the phrase "fashion police" a whole new meaning).
There is nothing in this legislation that prescribes a dress code or badges for Iranian religious minorities, and Maurice Motamed was present during its drafting and says nothing like that was even discussed."
This reads as if there's a discernible, if low-keyed, attempt to backtrack from some of the more extreme claims made re this proposed Iranian legislation.
And this media outlet is monotonously predictable in its many attempts to "sell" Israel to it's readership, so I'm guesing there might be a few red faces out there in the future.
Still, you've gotta wonder about the Iranians -- with their incredibly negative image, they propose legislation of this type, ambiguous enough on it's face and so easily misunderstood and so susceptible to the most hostile and negative misinterpretation and misrepresentation in the US media. I mean, the Iranians sure didn't benefit from yet another public black eye -- so what was the point?
Are they really that deranged and self-destructive?