Propoganda: Iran eyes badges for Jews

Chris Wattie
National Post

Friday, May 19, 2006

Jews were made to wear stars to identify them in Nazi Germany.

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.
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=11fbf4a8-282a-4d18-954f-546709b1240f&k=32073

Good to see the amount of reporting put into this article. Some statements from "iranian expatriates" + a rabbi from the Simon Wiesenthal center = easy propoganda.

And coincidentally, nothing on Amnesty International or Human Rights watch to support "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."
 
Well... is it true? Are they passing a law that requires non-muslims to identify themselves visually?

I mean its totally possible its all a lie, but i think the Iranians would say something in their defense if that was the case.
 
Cyre2067 said:
Well... is it true? Are they passing a law that requires non-muslims to identify themselves visually?

I mean its totally possible its all a lie, but i think the Iranians would say something in their defense if that was the case.
Considering the article once again touts the lie that "He has caused international outrage by publicly calling for Israel to be 'wiped off the map.'", which we now know is simply not true, I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in this article. Also, why would you say that Iran would 'say something in its defense'? - and that by not saying this 'something', then perhaps there is truth to what was said. I've no idea whether there is any basis of truth to this article, but the idea that a lack of response to an outlandish accusation implies guilt is a very dangerous idea indeed - or so it seems to me.
 
According to this report, it's false.

The National Post is sending shockwaves across the country this morning with a report that Iran's Parliament has passed a law requiring mandatory Holocaust style badges to identify Jews and Christians.
But independent reporter Meir Javedanfar, an Israeli Middle East expert who was born and raised in Tehran, says the report is false.
"It's absolutely factually incorrect," he told The New 940 Montreal.
"Nowhere in the law is there any talk of Jews and Christians having to wear different colours. I've checked it with sources both inside Iran and outside."
"The Iranian people would never stand for it. The Iranian government wouldn't be stupid enough to do it."
Political commentator and 940 Montreal host Beryl Waysman says the report is true, that the law was passed two years ago.
"Jews should wear yellow strips, Christians red strips, because according to the Iranian mullahs, if a Mulsim shakes hands with a non-Muslim he becomes unclean."

The National Post cites Iranian expatriots living in Canada as its primary source on the story.
The Post story can be read here: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=11fbf4a8-282a-4d18-954f-546709b1240f&k=32073
(You may have to highlight the link and copy and paste it into your browser.)
http://www.940news.com/locale.php?news=2512

It appears, so far, to be a case of "he said, she said", so I guess it's still up in the air.
 
UberSquid said:
The Iranian government wouldn't be stupid enough to do it."
Exactly. It is preposterous that the Iranian government would pass such a 'propoganda-fueling' law at this point in time, when US and European requirement for 'demonisation' of Iran is at a maximum. That was my first thought, as I see no indication that Iranian leaders and Ahmadinejad in particular are lacking reason (or at least no more so than the average follower of any organised religion!).
 
I was just looking at this and the story appears in the Asper controlled National Post which should give an indication of the "subjectivity level" of any Israel/Iran story. However, one could look a little deeper..

The story appears to have originated from Amir Teheri according to the most recent article from The National Post.

Iranian embassy denies dress code

Looking around for information on Teheri, we find Teheri was editor of Iran's newspaper "Kayhan" during the reign of the (CIA backed) Shah of Iran. Appears he may have been booted out by the Islamic revolution in 79..... well that's when his employment ended so I'm putting a high probability of this being the case.

http://www.benadorassociates.com/taheri.php

And looking at his list of associates at Bendora Associates we find Neocons (Perle) CIA advisors and members of the Council of Foreign relations (Pipes), Ex Rothschild employees (LaMont) and even an ex-Israeli "intelligence agent" (Raphael Israeli).

http://www.benadorassociates.com/members.php

And of interest......... with all these "experts" on the Middle East. Israel and Palestine don't seem to warrant a mention in the sidebar! How convenient, sometimes you can tell the direction of a group by what they AREN'T talking about.

So one wonders where did this piece of "black propaganda" really originate from? What was its purpose? Was it just to test the waters to see how much BS the reading public was ready to accept?
 
A follow up on this from Uruk:
Latest Hitler: how lies become news
Lenin's Tomb

iran_nazi_social_fabric.jpg

May 20, 2006

Canada's National Post ran a false story claiming that Iran was planning to oblige non-Muslims to wear badges to indicate their ethnicity so that they could be distinguished in public. Experts have already dissed the story.





The National Post tries, in a lustrum written by Chris Wattie, to distance itself from the sensationalist item by describing it as a "news story and column" by Amir Taheri - a column, an opinion piece, the work of a malevolent hoaxster perhaps. Except of course that the original news story was by, well, Chris Wattie. Wattie adds, in his own defense: "The Simon Wiesenthal Centre and Iranian expatriates living in Canada had confirmed that the order had been passed, although it still had to be approved by Iran's "Supreme Guide" Ali Khamenehi before being put into effect." Also cited in its defense is the view of the Simon Weisenthal Centre that, although it had no independent corroboration of the report, they believe it to be true. Further, Stephen Harper, the Tory Prime Minister of Canada, said Iran is "very capable" of enacting laws similar to the Nuremberg Laws under the Nazis.

Amir Taheri, of course, is a dubious figure. He is a sublunary of the Benador Associates, a right-wing PR firm that supplies conservative speakers for all sorts of occasions. He specialises in producing bilge about Iran, interpreting Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush as an attempt to provoke a clash of civilizations so that the Hidden Imam will return, while asserting not only that Iran wants a nuclear bomb, but that it wants one to - well, hasten a clash of civilizations so that the Hidden Imam will return. He has claimed that attacks on London and New York were inspired by a desire by some Muslims to exert total dictatorial control over what you eat for breakfast (which is cartoonish nonsense), referred to Tariq Ramadan as a Muslim Brotherhood militant (which is flatly false), smeared antiwar protesters as defenders of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, and asserted that Israel must claim victory over Palestine. As an "Iranian-born analyst" (they never forget to mention this), he is the neoconservative's favourite 'native informant' about Islam, the Middle East and how well various imperialist adventures are going. Commentary Magazine loves him, the Wall Street Journal loves him, the Telegraph loves him, the National Review loves him - to put it mildly, his brand of 'insight' is very popular with that baroque sodality of reactionary imperialists. Noteworthy that, after the story has already been rebutted, Amir Tehari has gone and retold the story to the New York Post with the headline 'Iran OKs "Nazi" Social Fabric'.



But what is more interesting than Tehari's corroborative role is that this utterly false and utterly implausible story was first published by the National Post and then taken up by newspapers and television stations across America and the West, and even a supposedly leftish site called Truthdig. The report cited no solid sources, merely adducing unnamed "human rights groups" were were "raising alarms" and unnamed "Iranian expatriates" who "confirmed reports". Well, I say 'unnamed' - one Iranian expatriate is named, some geezer called 'Ali Behroozian'. Quite how he was able to 'confirm' this claim, what qualified him in other words, is a mystery. Googling yields nothing about him, so either he's a private citizen, in which case the question about his qualifications to confirm anything for the National Post is repeated, or the name is all made up, in which case other questions come to mind. Possibly, these human rights groups and expatriates are of the same character as the Iraqi exiles who obligingly told Bush what he wanted to hear - or what he wanted others to hear - so that he could invade Iraq. Or one could equally suspect the hand of such PR groups as Hill & Knowlton, who famously manufactured a story about Iraqi soldiers ripping babies from incubators and leaving them to die on the floor. But what is clear, abundantly clear, is that any news reporter worth his or her salt would have spotted that this set of claims had fuck all to it. Hardly any sources, obtuse style, vagueness of details, nothing but colourful, arresting and emotionally involving claims and expostulations that divert one from analysis. As Alexandra Kitty explains in her useful book on lies becoming news, those are the absolutely standard tell-tale signs of a hoax. CBS boasts that it did not publish the story because "there were too many red flags" and not enough concrete information. Yet Fox News, MSNBC the New York Post, the New York Sun, the Washington Times, the American Jewish Congress, the Jerusalem Post and any number of wingnut sites and of course our progressive friend Truthdig all repeated these outrageous, obvious lies as if they were fact. Most, including our progressive friend Truthdig, followed the National Post's lead by illustrating their coverage with artefacts or photos from Nazi Germany.

At any rate, bear with me while I ponder the obvious: the sheer volume of misleading, manufactured, slanted, spun, stilted and distorted information being generated about Iran right now - and particularly the time-worn repetition of He's-A-Hitler themes - suggests that some kind of attack is afoot. In order to blast a geopolitical opponent to Hades these days, they must first be portrayed as genocidal maniacs, ready to launch aggressive wars, pointing nukes at us... any war will not only be defensive, therefore, but also an act of humanitarian largesse.
Pictures etc here: http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m23417&hd=0&size=1&l=e
 
At any rate, bear with me while I ponder the obvious: the sheer volume of misleading, manufactured, slanted, spun, stilted and distorted information being generated about Iran right now - and particularly the time-worn repetition of He's-A-Hitler themes - suggests that some kind of attack is afoot. In order to blast a geopolitical opponent to Hades these days, they must first be portrayed as genocidal maniacs, ready to launch aggressive wars, pointing nukes at us... any war will not only be defensive, therefore, but also an act of humanitarian largesse.
This is from Linebarger's "Psychological Warfare" 1954 edition Pages 128-131
which is the "primer" for PSYOPS operations. Linebarger's fear was that this
would be used in peace time(whatever that is) which a lot of it ufortunately has.

"Over and above the direct contribution to straight news or intelligence,
enemy propaganda in times of war or crisis affords a clue to enemy strategy.
If the co-ordination is not present the propaganda may do the enemy himself
harm. But the moment co-ordination is present, and one end of the
co-ordinate is handed over to us, we can start figuring what the
co-ordination is for. Sometimes propaganda is sacrificed for weightier
considerations of security; German propaganda gave little advance warning of
a war with the USSR, and Soviet propaganda gave none. In other instances,
the co-ordination does give the show away. (Johnno: The Manahattan project
is one instance of this)

"In 1941-42 the Japanese radio began to show an unwholesome interest in
Christmas Island in its broadcasts to Japanese at home and abroad. Christmas
Island, below Sumatra, was pointed out as a really important place, and
tremendously important to Naval strategy. Subsequently the Japanese armed
forces went to and took Christmas Island. The home public was delighted that
this vital spot had been secured. Of course Christmas Island was not as
important as Japanese radio said it was, but the significant thing was that
radio talked about it AHEAD OF TIME. For what little it was worth the
Japanese had given us warning......"

(Johnno: This section one paragraph later applies to Iran.)...

"A nation getting ready to strike a la Pearl Harbour may prepare by alleging
American aggresion. A nation preparing to break the peace frequently gets
out peace propaganda of the most blatant sort, trying to make sure that its
own audience (as well as the world) will believe the real responsibility to
lie in the victim he attacks. Hitler protested his love of Norwegian
neutrality; then he hit, claiming that he was protecting it from the
British. No hard and fast rules can be made up for all wars or all
beligerents. The Germans behaved according to one pattern; the Japanese
another."

"For example, the German High Command sought to avoid bragging about
anything they could not accomplish (Johnno:Observe USA's performance on North
Korea which would involve engaging China with it hundreds of millions of
ready for war population) They often struck blows without warning but they
never said they would strike a blow when they knew or believed they could
not do it. The British and Americans made a timetable of this, and were able
to guess how fast the Germans thought they were going to advance in Russia.
Knowing this, the British and Americans planned their propaganda to counter
the German boasts; they tried to pin the Germans down to objectives they
knew the Germans would not take, in order to demonstrate to the peoples of
Europe that Nazi Germany had finally bitten off more than it could chew."

"Later the Allies remembered this German habit when the Nazis on the radio
began talking about their own secret weapons. When the British bombed the
V-1 ramps on the French coast, the German radio stopped that talk. The
British had additional grounds for supposing that the ramps thay had bombed
were part of the secret weapons that the Germans bragged about. The British
further knew that the Germans would try to counter the psychologigal effect
of the annouoncement of Allied D Day with some pretty vivid news of their
own. When the German radio began mentioning secret weapons again, the
British suspected the Germans had got around damage done to the ramps. D-Day
came; the Germans, in one single broadcast designed to impress the Japanese
and Chinese, announced the secret German weapon was about to be turned
loose, and that more such weapons would follow. One day later the first V-1
hit London."

[..]Johnno: And the final chapter ends thus

"For peacetime purposes, it is to be rermembered that tough enemies may hide
their scientists, their launching ramps, or their rockets, they cannot hide
their occasion for war, nor their own readiness measures. No government can
afford to seem the plain unqualified aggressor. Propanal (Propaganda
Analysis) may prove to be one of the soundest war-forecasting systems
available to usin a period of ultra destructive weapons. Psychological
mobilization may be disguised; it cannot be concealed."
 
blindpsychic said:
In order to blast a geopolitical opponent to Hades these days, they must first be portrayed as genocidal maniacs, ready to launch aggressive wars, pointing nukes at us... any war will not only be defensive, therefore, but also an act of humanitarian largesse.
By this description, the US should have been 'blasted to Hades' over three years ago. The psychopath always accuses its victim of doing what it is, in fact, doing.
 
Fascinatingly, just now, from 3:20 - 3:25 PM EST, I witnessed on TV, CNN's Rick Sanchez interviewing, by web phone, an Iranian woman to get a report on the election taking place there now. He asked whom she voted for and she said "Achmedinejad" because she thought he had done well. Sanchez crumpled his face and said, "but he said Israel should be wiped off the map! Doesn't that concern you?" She replied, "Of course, but ..." and went on to explain that Achmedinejad never said that. What Sanchez was repeating was a mistranslation, which is far different in Farsi, and she said the president was actually quoting some ayatollah whose expression was more along the lines of Israel "will fade from time." This is, of course, all right in line with the original BBC translation, ignored in the US.

After hanging up, Sanchez, who comes across as perhaps the most dim-witted of all CNN anchors, crumpled his face again, saying, "sometimes you wish you could interview someone for a lot longer," as if to express that he needed to convince this poor woman that her candidate is a monster.
 
PopHistorian said:
Fascinatingly, just now, from 3:20 - 3:25 PM EST, I witnessed on TV, CNN's Rick Sanchez interviewing, by web phone, an Iranian woman to get a report on the election taking place there now. He asked whom she voted for and she said "Achmedinejad" because she thought he had done well. Sanchez crumpled his face and said, "but he said Israel should be wiped off the map! Doesn't that concern you?" She replied, "Of course, but ..." and went on to explain that Achmedinejad never said that. What Sanchez was repeating was a mistranslation, which is far different in Farsi, and she said the president was actually quoting some ayatollah whose expression was more along the lines of Israel "will fade from time." This is, of course, all right in line with the original BBC translation, ignored in the US.

After hanging up, Sanchez, who comes across as perhaps the most dim-witted of all CNN anchors, crumpled his face again, saying, "sometimes you wish you could interview someone for a lot longer," as if to express that he needed to convince this poor woman that her candidate is a monster.

Yes, Sanchez surely is a useful idiot performing his function. And, his crumpled face remark was likely made to ensure that his remark was the last one the viewers would hear. The woman's remark clarifying Amadinejad's correct statement might just have been heard! ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom