As many of you know, a small but interesting brouhaha has been created by a Canadian National Post story – based on a Amir Taheri column in the NY Post – alleging that the Mullahs were considering enacting dress codes (shades of the Holocaust) for political minorities in Iran. Denials have been issued. Maurice Mottamed – the Jewish representative in the Iranian parliament (what a job!) – proclaimed the allegation a “mischievous act” and said he had never heard of such a piece of legislation. My friend Tim Blair opined this might be the Plastic Turkey Story for conservatives and conservative blogs, who jumped on the salacious rumor without confirmation.
Well, maybe.
Let’s leave aside for the moment that Sen. Chuck Schumer was the first politician to howl in protest and that the liberal-conservative dichotomy is so tedious it’s in danger of replacing Ambien as the world’s most popular sleeping pill. Something is clearly going on here – the question is what. Legislation about dress codes has apparently been in front of the Majlis for some time. Part of the intention of this legislation would be to encourage Islamic dress among the young by preventing the sale of designer clothes and jeans. We could insert a number of jokes here, but what constitutes Islamic dress and how that relates to Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians (all Iranians were once Zoroastrians) are not clear. According to Dr. Zin at Regime Change Iran, maybe it could be. He writes:
Amir Taheri said the law “envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities.” This was taken by many to mean that the current law requires it, but the word “envisages” means: To conceive an image or a picture of, especially as a future possibility: envisaged a world at peace.Why does he say it “envisages” it? Perhaps it is because it has been reported that a separate dress code for minorities has been included in earlier versions of the proposed law. Later in the article he discusses specifics of what this dress code would require. This has created confusion for many since in this part of the article it appears as if he is saying it is part of the current bill. Hopefully Amir will clarify this point in the near future. Unfortunately, since no one has yet published a complete translation of the actual text of the law we will have to wait until it is available. One would think that the main stream media would publish a complete translation of it, but as of this time it is not available.
Don’t held your breath. Meanwhile, as David Horovitz at the Jerusalem Post points out, why the astonishment? Ahmadinejad has already declared his support for wiping Israel off the map. Dress codes are small change by comparison.
UPDATE: Neoneocon has a post on how Mr. Mottamed (see above) and similar representatives get elected to the Majlis.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
10 Comments
1. DanM:To back a mandatory dress code for muslims would, de facto, identify any minority. This without legislating a “Star of David” identifier. The Jews are top on the list for Islam… But, there is a list.
May 21, 2006 - 7:21 pm 2. RBMN:It’s gotten to the point, that if any news report adheres too strictly to the template of the day, to current common wisdom, I wait at least three days to believe it. Even in the case of Iran.
For example, if the President is quoted as saying, “today’s border is underfencified, we need more fencification in certain areas,” then I’ll find it hard to believe he really said it. It’s a perfect match to the leftwing cynic’s template. I’ll just assume the “reporter” said to himself/herself, “the White House will never be able to prove he didn’t say it, so what the hell.” That’s the problem today. I think “reporters” write whatever they believe they can get away with, and most of those getting away with it are on the left.
May 21, 2006 - 9:50 pm 3. Tollhouse:Someone had linked a blogger with a translation of the bill. Can’t recall exactly who. No mention of yellow stripes and whatnot, but, there was, to me anyway, an interesting allusion to minority ethnic clothing.
May 21, 2006 - 11:07 pm 4. adhoc:What I think is a reliable translation of the actual legislation is linked to (and the progress of the story discussed)here. As you will see from the comments on my post, there is no shortage of people who sort of believe this story. Amir Taheri’s original article made some pretty definitive statements about the law requiring precise codes and colours for Jews, Christians and other religions to wear. I don’t know how he came to do this.
The fact that Ahmadinejad has expressed the intention of wiping Israel off the map is what has enabled the story to gain such instance credence. But it’s all the more reason to be especially cautious in believing every story of the outrageous coming out of Iran. No doubt the Iranian regime and their many western sympathizers will make hay out of smearing the Taheri story as a supposed instance of a zionist plot against Islam.
May 22, 2006 - 12:22 am 5. jedrury:After reading Mark Bowden’s “Guests of the Ayatollah,” I view Iran as existing on another planet, populated by weird lying hatemongers for whom logic and reason are foreign. The book made my American blood boil. These Iranian true believers are no different – no different – from the Nazi storm troopers of the 1930s; filled with hate, rabidly anti-Semitic and imbecilic.
Wait didn’t we win a war against fascism 50 years ago?
May 22, 2006 - 1:23 am 6. Ron Wrght:Never Again – No More Stinking Final Solutions!
Roger,
I’m glad your following this developing story the more the better for finding the real truth.
See my two cents in these comments I’ve posted at other sites continuing to follow and update this story.
RBT
*****
[Kobayashi Maru]
KBM
Atlas is continuing to follow this story this morning and I posted this comment in her thread.
RBT
*****
Never Again – No More Stinking Final Solutions!
Good Morning Super Babe,
The world must never forget the “Big Lie” and “The Final Solution.” Also Hitler wasn’t the originator of this Evil and madness as some have noted this has strong Islamic historical roots.
We must stick on this story like stink on poop and run it to ground. There is no excuse in the free world for Final Solutions with the interconnectivity of the Net, the Blogos and the Army of Davids Effect
Lose the Army of Davids!
I posted this comment below in your other thread and thought it appropriate here too.
Go get them girl!
RBT
*****
It ain’t over until the fat lady sings. The fat lady hasn’t sung yet.
Dr. Zin has returned home and is commenting. See this piece re the dangers of not dealing with Evil starring us in the face. There is historical precedence for this unlike Rathergate and “fake but accurate” nonsense of the LL and the MSM.
*****
UPDATE – Dr. Zin is now back and commenting on the Islamic dress code story from yst. See his thoughts here and follow his site Regime Change Iran as this story continues to develop.
There is truth to this story and shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand. President MAD and the Mad Mullahs as Dr. Zin notes are pursuing an incrementalistic strategy.
RBT has this further analogy. A frog will die in a pot of boiling water if brought slowly to a boil!
Read More
May 22, 2006 - 7:32 am 7. Curmudgeon:“all Iranians were once Zoroastrians”
May 22, 2006 - 7:48 am 8. Fausta:No, that hasn’t been true for over a thousand years. You should have said ” Once, all Iranians were Zoroastrian.”
A Vote of Thanks Is Expressed By Iranian Jews
May 22, 2006 - 12:15 pm 9. Anat:Yesterday, Mr. Kermanian said he was grateful for the outpouring of international support after the report of the badges legislation first surfaced. “Our community was heartened to see so much international support on the subject,” he said. “And considering the anti-Semitic environment in Iran, which exists due to government-sanctioned propaganda, this sort of support is a matter of great comfort to us now.”
Additionally, An Iranian-American anti-regime activist living in New York, Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi, said the formal legislation does not contain language on the special insignias, but added that Mr. Taheri was correct in saying this measure is being discussed and considered
Tollhouse,
A translation of the proposed bill appears in Hossein Derakhshan’s Blog,
http://hoder.com/weblog/archives/015264.shtml
The clause you mention is #2:
“Respecting the traditional patterns and lively symbols of Iranian ethnic groups and paying attention to proper body coverage based on Islamic Sharia.”
I wrote to Hossein asking what may be the meaning of “the traditional patterns and lively symbols of Iranian ethnic groups”, but received no answer. It may be quite innocent. Who knows.
May 22, 2006 - 12:39 pm 10. Craig:The irony/hypocrisy meter hit close to 100% on this gem:
“I think “reporters” write whatever they believe they can get away with, and most of those getting away with it are on the left.”
(Read ‘mediamatters.org’ some time to get a fuller sense of the constant practice by the right).
May 22, 2006 - 5:20 pm