• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

The Post lies, ... no really,


TRIBE Member
This type of "mistake" should have some kind of reprocussion. I can't beleive the post will get away with this.


In case this is a subscription page, here's the article:

Iran denies ‘mischievous’ allegations on Jews
Gareth Smyth in Tehran
Published: May 21 2006 20:26 | Last updated: May 21 2006 20:26

Iranian officials and politicians have strongly condemned a Canadian newspaper report alleging that Iran had passed a law requiring Jews to wear yellow badges on their clothes.

The story also claimed Christians and Zoroastrians, the two other main religious minorities in mainly Muslim Iran, would have to wear badges identifying themselves.

“When I heard this, I immediately felt it was a mischievous act, a fresh means of pressure against the Iranian government,” Maurice Motammed, the Jews’ deputy in the Iranian parliament, told the FT on Sunday. “We representatives for religious minorities are active in the parliament, and there has never been any mention of such a thing.”

The story, published in Canada’s National Post on Friday, was also reported by the UPI news agency and widely posted on websites.
Iran tops agenda when Olmert meets Bush
Click here

It led Chuck Schumer, a US senator to issue a news release calling the Iranian regime “lunatic” and “pernicious”. At a White House press briefing, spokesman Sean McCormack said such a measure would be “despicable” and “carry clear echoes of Germany under Hitler”.

Chris Wattie, the reporter, sourced his story only to Jewish groups and “Iranian exiles”. He quoted Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, saying the move was “reminiscent of the holocaust” and that Iran was “moving closer and closer to the ideology of the Nazis”.

The Post story was drawn from a column in the paper by Amir Taheri, editor of the state-owned Kayhan newspaper under the Shah of Iran before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Mr Taheri claimed the law was “drafted two years ago” and had been revived “under pressure” from President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad.

“The new codes would enable Muslims to easily recognise non-Muslims so that they can avoid shaking hands with them by mistake, and thus becoming najis (unclean),” Mr Taheri wrote.

A contributor to various newspapers including the New York Post, the Wall Street Journal and Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, a leading Arabic-language newspaper, Mr Taheri is an opponent of talks between the US and Iran.

He wrote in the New York Post last month the US should “go for regime change in Tehran” as the only way to stop Iran’s drive to “dominate the region and use it as the nucleus of an Islamic superpower which would then seek global domination”.

In Tehran, Hamid-Reza Asefi, the foreign ministry spokesmen, said “a Zionist operation” was “active in different countries, including Canada, to foment psychological war and spread lies” about Iran.

“It’s being done now because of the nuclear issue to give a negative image of the Islamic Republic,” he added
Cannabis Seed Wedding Bands


TRIBE Promoter

that story had bullshit written all over it from day one. i wonder if the NP are actually going to be taken to task though? i doubt it...


TRIBE Member
Not that I have any inside info, or even doubt for a second that this is a nicely timely propaganda move, all I see in the article is that a member of the Iranian government denies the bill exists.

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Colm said:
all I see



TRIBE Member
From the National Post on Friday May 19, 2006

Experts say report of badges for Jews in Iran is untrue

Mr. Kermanian said the subject of “what to do with religious minorities” came up during debates leading up to the passing of the dress code law.

“It is possible that some ideas might have been thrown around,” he said. “But to the best of my knowledge the final version of the law does not demand any identifying marks by the religious minority groups.”

Ali Reza Nourizadeh, an Iranian commentator on political affairs in London, suggested that the requirements for badges or insignia for religious minorities was part of a “secondary motion” introduced in parliament, addressing the changes specific to the attire of people of various religious backgrounds.

Mr. Nourizadeh said that motion was very minor and was far from being passed into law.

Mr. Javdanfar said that not all clauses of the law had been passed through the parliament and said the requirement that Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians wear special insignia might be part of an older version of the Islamic dress law, which was first written two years ago.
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
Didn't want to start another Iran thread. I always enjoy listening to right wingers give right wingers hell. Just got done reading this article:

Paranoia as Policy
How Bush Brewed the Iran Crisis

Why did the Bush regime create a crisis over Iran?

The answer is that the Bush regime is desperate to widen the war in the Middle East.

What has Iran done? Unlike Israel, Pakistan and India, countries that developed nuclear weapons on the sly, Iran signed the non-proliferation treaty. Countries that sign this treaty have the right to develop nuclear energy. The International Atomic Energy Agency monitors their energy programs to guard against the programs being used to cloak a weapons program. Until the Bush regime provoked a crisis, Iran was cooperating with the inspection safeguards. The weapons inspectors have found no Iranian weapons programs.

There is no evidence for the Bush regime's accusation that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. What the Bush regime is trying to do is to unilaterally take away Iran's right under the non-proliferation treaty to develop nuclear energy. It is the Bush regime that is violating the treaty by attempting to deny its benefits to Iran. The Bush regime is acting illegally because of its paranoid suspicion that 5 or 10 years in the future Iran will use what it has managed to learn about uranium enrichment to develop a weapons program.

Why is the Bush regime concerned about what Iran might do in the future? Is it because the US government intends to continue its bullying in the MIddle East and is worried that Iran will get tired of it and develop nuclear weapons as a check on US hegemony over the Muslim world? Why does the Bush regime think that its interest in the Middle East takes priority over the interests of the countries that are located there?

In a CNN TV interview on Sunday May 21, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said that it was only a matter of months before Iran would be making nuclear weapons.

Olmert's claim is absurd as every weapons expert knows, and, indeed, as he knows himself. The only possible purpose of such a nonsensical claim is propaganda. Olmert is helping the Bush regime use fear to prepare Americans to accept an attack on Iran, just as Dick Cheney and Condi Rice invoked images of mushroom clouds to prepare Americans for the illegal invasion of Iraq.

One might think that having been deceived by the Bush regime over Iraq, the American people would have their eyes open to deception this time around. But apparently not. The same public that gives Bush a mere 30% approval rating, largely because of the Iraqi fiasco, is making no demands that Bush stop his march to war with Iran.

Not a day passes without new threats and lies issuing from Dick Cheney, Bonkers Bolton, and Condi Rice, and no one holds them accountable. The US media is proud to be complicit in lies and war crimes.

Ah, but the Iranian president said that he was going to "wipe Israel off the face of the earth."

He did not. He said that Israel should be wiped off the face of the Middle East in the sense of being removed to Europe. He was making the rhetorical point that if the Europeans so favored a Jewish state, why did the Westerners not give the Jews part of Europe or North America? Why did they give the Jews Palestine, which was not theirs to give?

One may agree or disagree with the Iranian's point, but it was not a threat to kill the Jews.

The Iranians cannot kill the Jews even if they wanted, because Israel has nuclear weapons. Being somewhat paranoid--not altogether without reason--Israel is not going to sit there and be destroyed.

The US cannot forever dominate the Middle East in behalf of its interests and Israel's. The US is running out of resources. The US is heavily in debt, yet continues to hemorrhage red ink. Washington is dependent on foreigners to finance its wars. Offshoring has diminished America's ability to manufacture. The US is now dependent on China for advanced technology products and on Europe and Asia for manufactured goods. The American middle class is beginning to experience employment problems and income stagnation. The neocons' idea that the US can patrol Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and Syria in perpetuity is insane. The Bush regime has proven that the US cannot even occupy Baghdad.

Unless the US government intends nuclear genocide against Muslims, it cannot prevail in war in the MIddle East. A solution in the Middle East requires diplomacy and good will, not threats and aggression. Yet, the Bush regime refuses to even meet with Iranian leaders.

By refusing to meet, talk, and negotiate, Bush is telling Iranians that they have no choice. Either they comply and do what Bush demands, or they will be attacked.

That is the Iranian Crisis in a nutshell.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com


TRIBE Member
What I find most surprising about that article is learning that Iran has a Jewish MP. How did that happen?