Iran: no clothing id plot

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on March 6th, 2018 at 12:30 am

Iranian politicians reject Canadian claims (repeated in Australia) that new laws would require Iranian Jews to wear “a yellow strip of cloth on the front of their clothes”:

In Tehran, legislator Emad Afroogh, who sponsored the bill and chairs the parliament’s cultural committee, told The Associated Press on Friday there was no truth to the Canadian newspaper report.

“It’s a sheer lie. The rumors about this are worthless,” he said.

Afroogh said the bill seeks only to make women dress more conservatively and avoid Western fashions …

Iranian Jewish lawmaker Morris Motamed told the AP: “Such a plan has never been proposed or discussed in parliament. Such news, which appeared abroad, is an insult to religious minorities here.”

At Iran’s mission to the United Nations, a diplomat, speaking anonymously because he was not allowed to make official statements, called the report “completely false.”

Seems so. This story should be widely stomped, lest it grow into a right-wing version of the Plastic Turkey fable.

UPDATE. More from Canada’s National Post, which published the original claims:

Several experts are casting doubt on reports that Iran had passed a law requiring the country’s Jews and other religious minorities to wear coloured badges identifying them as non-Muslims …

Sam Kermanian, of the U.S.-based Iranian-American Jewish Federation, said in an interview from Los Angeles that he had contacted members of the Jewish community in Iran — including the lone Jewish member of the Iranian parliament — and they denied any such measure was in place.

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.”

UPDATE II. The New York Sun.


Well, as Juan Cole would say, “The story of the yellow ID tags for Jews turns out to be a hoax. However, it is one of those hoaxes that bespeaks a reality …”

Or how about plasticturkeychump Jeff Alworth: “Whether or not the ID-tags-for-Jews story was fake has little bearing on its purpose as metaphor.”

So there.

Posted by Tim B. on 05/19/2006 at 09:27 PM
    1. Oh, well, in that case—hugs all around.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 05 19 at 09:53 PM • permalink


    1. Afroogh said the bill seeks only to make women dress more conservatively and avoid Western fashions …

      “We’re not hassling Jews, we’re just telling some of our sluts to cover their faces and stop whoring it up with the colored prints.”

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 05 19 at 09:58 PM • permalink


    1. No oppression of Jews.  We’re just forcing women to mummify themselves.  No problem.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 05 19 at 10:05 PM • permalink


    1. How did you manage to post that a full 20 minutes after we’re reading it?

      Posted by anagallis on 2006 05 19 at 10:08 PM • permalink


    1. It would be interesting to find out –smells grant money– whether any lefty blogs reacted as quickly in correcting the plastic turkey story as Tim and several other righty blogs did in correcting this (apparently) fake news item.

      Posted by paco on 2006 05 19 at 10:15 PM • permalink


    1. only women being oppressed?  phew, that’s ok then. when’s the state sponsored witch burning? i’ll volunteer for immolation

      Posted by KK on 2006 05 19 at 10:15 PM • permalink


    1. Translation: We Iranians are just medieval superstitious idiots, we’re not Germans.

      Glad we got that cleared up.

      Posted by Harry Eagar on 2006 05 19 at 10:17 PM • permalink


    1. Still thinking about that sandwich two posts down.

      Do lefties eat plastic turkey on their sandwiches?

      Posted by TimT on 2006 05 19 at 10:17 PM • permalink


    1. Well, as Juan Cole would say, “The story of the yellow ID tags for Jews turns out to be a hoax. However, it is one of those hoaxes that bespeaks a reality…”

      Or how about plasticturkeychump Jeff Alworth: “Whether or not the ID-tags-for-Jews story was fake has little bearing on its purpose as metaphor.”

      So there.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 05 19 at 10:20 PM • permalink


    1. Come now, shame on all of you. Ok, just because the Iranian’s have called for the destruction of Israel and have sponsored hijinks such as the Holocaust cartoon competition doesn’t mean that any of this is remotely possible.

      Posted by Nic on 2006 05 19 at 10:29 PM • permalink


    1. What happens to Kosher Turkeys?

      Posted by Andrew on 2006 05 19 at 10:34 PM • permalink


    1. The link is empty.

      Posted by Paul on 2006 05 19 at 10:40 PM • permalink


    1. Friday, May 19, 2006 3:57 p.m. EDT
      Iran: Jews, Christians Must Wear Badges


      The new law was drafted two years ago, but lingered in the Iranian parliament until recently when it was revived at the urging of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

      Australia’s Prime Minister John Howard told reporters about the law: “Anything of that kind would be totally repugnant to civilized countries, if it’s the case, and something that would just further indicate to me the nature of this regime. It would be appalling.”


      This is probably quite true, revulsion by many right thinkers in the world, that have the means to make ASHout of Persia, made these Islamapsychopaths, blink again.

      What has to be remembered is that regardless of whiz-bang weaponry the Persians have OR say they have, in an 8 year war with Iraq, the Persians gained the territory that they had lost to Iraq….after 8 years. The ‘leaders’ and people of Persia are not a modern day Darius or Xerxes.

      If the people of Persia insist in NOT throwing the madmen out and their asses overload their mouths, one to many times…Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 05 19 at 10:53 PM • permalink


    1. Of course there will be no Iranian laws requiring Christians and Jews to wear coloured patches.

      They know who and where they are already.

      Posted by geoff on 2006 05 19 at 11:09 PM • permalink


    1. I believe, centuries ago, Christians were required to wear blue turbans and Jews, yellow turbans.

      Posted by paco on 2006 05 19 at 11:52 PM • permalink


    1. Maybe someone suggested they read The Book of Esther.

      That might have given them pause.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 05 20 at 12:05 AM • permalink


    1. UpdateThe Australian.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 05 20 at 12:48 AM • permalink


    1. Probably Ahmedinejad would just think his old ancestor Haman got a raw deal.

      Well it’s good news that this story is false.  Let’s hope it doesn’t give the Pharaohs of Teheran any ideas.

      The Iranians have until their jerk leaders start the nuke war they seem to have their hearts set on to overthrow said jerks.  After that it will be too damn late, and they will be caught in the nuclear crossfire of massivem retaliation.  At that point it will no longer be possible to tell the anti-mullah Iranians from the pro-mullah ones, all will be fried alike.  They must get off their keisters NOW and get rid of the Pharaohs, for their own sakes as well as ours.  The Iranians put these vicious clowns into power 27 years ago and the primary duty of removing them lies with the Iranians.

      Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 05 20 at 12:50 AM • permalink


    1. Yes, it was fake, but accurate.

      Posted by jorgen on 2006 05 20 at 01:18 AM • permalink


    1. Er, exactly how many Jews and Christians are in Iran?

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 05 20 at 01:57 AM • permalink


    1. Dave S.

      Er, exactly how many Jews and Christians are in Iran?

      Venture to say, not as many as there use to be.

      No…I’m NOT a Middle East expert, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express, last night…:).

      Oh and cheer up…next stop, 41…lol.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 05 20 at 06:21 AM • permalink


    1. Well some of our Leftie bloggers in Canada are getting upset over the reporting of this by the
      right wing press, and how they “over-reacted”, but notice how the Left stayed silent on this, as if they would have not go upset anyway over this, just as the left stays silent of much of what goes on in Iran.

      read this from my favoritie leftie blogger in Canada.

      Posted by Torontosteve on 2006 05 20 at 06:21 AM • permalink


    1. 30,000 Jews, down from 85,000 on the eve of the revolution, remain in Iran

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 05 20 at 07:37 AM • permalink


    1. More on the subject…

      Not A Law Yet [Jonah Goldberg]

      That story about Iran forcing Jews and other minorities to wear badges seems to have overstated things. But it certainly sounds like something some Iranians were talking about.
      Posted at 7:02 AM


      This link has A link to The Canadian National Post

      As I mentioned…This is probably quite true, revulsion by many right thinkers in the world, that have the means to make ASH out of Persia, made these Islamapsychopaths, blink again.

      I truly believe the Persian action was in fact a shari`a trial balloon…withdrawn. The Persian action along with their plunging forward with the nuke fetish, would have completed THIS, with THIS as a possible, consequence.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 05 20 at 08:07 AM • permalink


    1. Well, if they “only” mean to “make” women dress more conservatively and avoid Western fashions, what’s the problem? Who cares what women want, anyway?

      Posted by Sissy Willis on 2006 05 20 at 09:19 AM • permalink


    1. 30,000 Jews, down from 85,000 on the eve of the revolution, remain in Iran

      Those are some gutsy sons-a-bitches.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2006 05 20 at 10:35 AM • permalink


    1. I think this is why when I saw it, there was a feeling of it could be true…….

      “it is one of those hoaxes that bespeaks a reality”

      Thinking about it, the fact that so many of us believed it in part speaks volumes about the actual facts of what we are dealing with as an enemy.

      Posted by Wild Thing on 2006 05 20 at 10:44 AM • permalink


    1. “It’s a sheer lie. The rumours about this are worthless,” [MP Emad Afroogh] said.

      Funny, this is exactly the kind of denial we get about nuclear weapons development as they continue to refine weapons grade material. I agree with the Cid, this is one of those “let’s toss it out there and see if it floats” things. They did, it didn’t. Next.

      The story in yesterday’s Jerusalem Post had this:

      Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter responded to the new law Friday night, saying, “Whoever makes Jews anywhere wear the yellow star again, will find themselves in a coffin draped in black.”

      I know that would give me pause.

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 05 20 at 10:57 AM • permalink


    1. In Torontosteve’s link, Antonia Zerbisias calls us “right wingdings”. I like it.

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 05 20 at 11:02 AM • permalink


    1. Here’s a good explanation for Rove’s non-frog-march (can frogs march?) which has had the DU fools all a twitter.

      “we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle”.  That’s beautiful.  Not, “I drank the bong water and it all seemed so real”, or “I stopped taking my lithium and I thought the voices in my head were Air America (but then Air America does sound like the voices in my head)”.

      When the occasion requires it, I’ll be trotting out, “Your honor, I erred in getting too far out in front of the law-cycle”.

      Posted by Craig Mc on 2006 05 20 at 11:12 AM • permalink


    1. Act III

      The story that will not go away…

      Covering Iran

      Today, the news starts to seep into the American press. Many papers, like the New York Times and Minneapolis Star Tribune, confined their coverage to an Associated Press story by Tarek al-Issawi headlined “Iranian Lawmakers Debate Women’s Clothing.” The AP story notes the National Post report, but goes on to debunk it by quoting three Iranian sources, all of whom declare that it is false.

      The New York Post, on the other hand, features a column by Amir Taheri that includes details on the law that I haven’t seen anywhere else:

      According to Ahmadinejad, the new Islamic uniforms will establish “visual equality” for Iranians as they prepare for the return of the Hidden Imam. A committee that consists of members from the Ministry of Islamic Orientation, the Ministry of Commerce and the Cultural Subcommittee of the Islamic Majlis is scheduled to propose the new uniforms by next autumn. These would then have to be approved by “Supreme Guide” Ali Khamenei before being imposed by law.


      And the new sartorial regime won’t necessarily be limited to Iran, according to Taheri:

      What is already labeled “the Islamic clothes revolution” will not be limited to Iran. Tehran has already sent a team to Lebanon to inform the Hezbollah of the new law and train cadres to impose it on Lebanese Shiites.


      Time will tell who is right…..

      Power Line Blog

      If true and IF this comes to fruition and it plays out as this Islamapsychotic is told by some asshole, under a well…all I can say IS, Persia is completing that target.

      Posted by El Cid on 2006 05 20 at 11:14 AM • permalink


    1. Craig, one of the Truthout commenters has the explanation. It’s all Bush’s fault:

      Granted I’ll give you that
      however, we’re living in a different time now one like we’ve never known before.  The desparation and anxiety that has been created by this administration has generated such a sense of expediency to rid ourselves of this evil possibly there were hasty decisions made.  We should use this as an unifying opportunity and turn it into an advantage.

      “Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.” – John F. Kennedy
      by emah1 on Fri May 19th, 2006 at 08:39:34 PM EDT

      Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 05 20 at 12:13 PM • permalink


    1. #32, Kyda

      That poor little dear.  Cut him some slack.  It sounds like he’s got that psychotic George Bushitlerelectionstealer thingy that got everybody down after the election.  You’d think by now they’d have the dosages worked out.  Obviously the Bush Administration is shirking its duty to pour government funds into the research that desparately needs to be done.  What are poor sufferers like this Craig guy to do?

      Posted by saltydog on 2006 05 21 at 12:27 AM • permalink


    1. Ah, dhimmitude. I wonder if John Howard (bless ‘im), or Bush or Blair, are familiar with the concept and its historical significance.

      Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch comments:
      “Experts say report of badges for Jews in Iran is untrue. Untrue, or too hot for public consumption at this time? That remains to be seen. While Nazi analogies dominate analyses of this, as I pointed out yesterday it is actually a revival of traditional elements of Islamic law for dhimmis. That makes it entirely reasonable that an aggressive Islamic state like Iran would reinstitute such laws; but now that international attention has focused upon them for contemplating doing so, it is likely not that they will abandon the project, but simply implement it when the world media has turned to other matters.
      ….Well, all this bewilderment and denial follows a consistent pattern; this is how mujahedin have consistently behaved when caught red-handed. So I don’t think that it means that this law doesn’t exist or will not be implemented. And I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if it is implemented, quietly, and soon.”

      Prime Minister John Howard was among three world leaders who today said an Iranian bill, which reportedly would force non-Muslims to wear coloured badges in public, was akin to Nazi Germany.
      ……More like Nazi Germany was akin to Islam.

      Tehran, 28 Nov 2005.
      Non-Muslims “cannot be called human beings but are animals who roam the earth and engage in corruption.” said Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati last week at a ceremony in north-eastern Iran to commemorate the ‘martyrs’ of the Revolutionary Guards and the war against Iraq (1980-88).
      The Zoroastrian community in Iran is estimated to number some 22,000 – half the size of that in existence before the 1979 Islamic revolution.
      The (Iranian) Constitution states that “within the limits of the law,” Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians are the only recognized religious minorities who are guaranteed freedom to practice their religion; however, members of these recognized minority religious groups have reported imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on their religious beliefs. Adherents of religions not recognized by the Constitution do not enjoy freedom to practice their beliefs. This restriction seriously affects adherents of the Baha’i Faith, which the Government regards as a heretical Islamic group with a political orientation that is antagonistic to the country’s Islamic revolution….
      Non-Muslim owners of grocery shops are required to indicate their religious affiliation on the fronts of their shops….
      By law and practice, religious minorities are not allowed to be elected to a representative body or to hold senior government or military positions; however, 5 of a total 270 seats in the Majlis are reserved for religious minorities….

      Posted by Skid Marx on 2006 05 21 at 01:05 AM • permalink


    1. The writings of the much lionized Sufi theologian and jurist al-Ghazali (d. 1111) highlight how the institution of dhimmitude was simply a normative, and prominent feature of the Shari’a:
      …the dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle.. .Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya [poll tax on non-Muslims]…on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]… They are not permitted to ostentatiously display their wine or church bells…their houses may not be higher than the Muslim’s, no matter how low that is. The dhimmi may not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the saddler-work] is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They [the dhimmis] have to wear [an identifying] patch [on their clothing], even women, and even in the [public] baths…[dhimmis] must hold their tongue.

      Interviewed by Wall Street Journal reporter Karby Legget (and published in the December 23-26 edition The Wall Street Journal), Hassam El-Masalmeh, who heads the Hamas contingent at the municipal council of Bethlehem, confirmed the organizations plan to re-institute the humiliating jizya, a blood ransom Qur’anic poll-tax (based on Qur’an sura [chapter] 9, verse 29), levied traditionally on non-Muslims vanquished by jihad, and forced to live under Islamic Law (the Shari’a). Under the Sharia’s regulations, either the non-Muslim infidels must convert to Islam, or they pay the jizya—classically, in a humiliating public ceremony which often involved blows to the head or neck—and their life and belongings are protected. The nature of such “protection” is clarified in this definition of jizya by the seminal Arabic lexicographer, E.W. Lane, based on a careful analysis of the etymology of the term:
      The tax that is taken from the free non-Muslim subjects of a Muslim government whereby they ratify the compact that assures them protection, as though it were compensation for not being slain.
      The “contract of the “jizya”, or “dhimma” encompassed other obligatory and recommended obligations for the conquered non-Muslim “dhimmi” peoples. Collectively, these “obligations” formed the discriminatory system of dhimmitude imposed upon non-Muslims – Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists – subjugated by jihad. Some of the more salient features of dhimmitude include:
      the prohibition of arms for the vanquished non-Muslims (dhimmis); the prohibition of church bells; restrictions concerning the building and restoration of churches, synagogues, and temples; inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims with regard to taxes and penal law; the refusal of dhimmi testimony by Muslim courts; a requirement that Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims, including Zoroastrians and Hindus, wear special clothes; and the overall humiliation and abasement of non-Muslims.
      It is important to note that these regulations and attitudes were institutionalized as permanent features of the sacred Islamic law, or Shari’a. Islam manifests itself as a political ideology, not merely a religion, when its teachings are followed on these and other prominent and enduring features.
      During his Wall Street Journal interview, El-Masalmeh stated explicitly,
      We in Hamas intend to implement this tax (i.e., the jizya) someday. We say it openly – we welcome everyone to Palestine but only if they agree to live under our rules.

      18th century Turkey was no interfaith utopia. In 1758, a British ambassador noted that Sultan Mustafa III had non-Muslim Christians and Jews executed for wearing banned clothing. In 1770, another ambassador reported that Greeks, Armenians and Jews seen outside their homes after dark were hanged. In 1785, a third noted that Muslim mobs had dismantled churches after Christians had secretly repaired them.
      “The golden age of equal rights was a myth, and belief in it was a result, more than a cause, of Jewish sympathy for Islam,” Bernard Lewis wrote in 1968 in the Encyclopedia of Islam. “The myth was invented in 19th century Europe as a reproach to Christians—and taken up by Muslims in our own time as a reproach to Jews….”
      Until the late 19th century, Jews in North Africa, Yemen and other oriental Muslim lands, were obliged to live isolated, in special quarters, and “were constrained to wear distinctive clothing.”

      Now, if only Dubya would stop calling Islam “…a religion of peace and justice”, and call a spade a spade.

      Posted by Skid Marx on 2006 05 21 at 01:08 AM • permalink


    1. The left is too quick to call this a hoax.  The Iranian parliament still has to vote on the details of “visual equality”.

      The law is still in the process of being worked out.  When I blogged about this I pointed out that this started out as “dress code”.

      The left will regret their premature assessment of this just as they will regret accepting Iran’s denial of their nuclear ambitions.

      Hitler denied that he had any territorial ambitions beyond the Sudetenland in 1938.  You lefties may want to wiki that since you have no concept of the word appeasement.

      Appeasement, by the way, means accepting denials as truth because to face reality is unbearable.

      Posted by bernieg on 2006 05 22 at 01:19 PM • permalink


    1. Mr Tim, last Friday

      This story should be widely stomped, lest it grow into a right-wing version of the Plastic Turkey fable.

      My local RW talk-news station makes a point, at 7:15 every morning, to play a one-minute screed by Rush Limbaugh.  I think it’s a public service, to make sure listeners are irritated-off enough to be out of bed by that time.  Any way, there was old Rush, today, Monday morning, reading the Iran-dress-code story like it was straight news.
      Not a great morning to be a RWDB.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 05 22 at 04:27 PM • permalink


    1. Someone who knows of Al-Ghazali…wow. I thought I’d never hear from one on a blog. He was somewhat of an historian as well.

      Stoopy, every morning is a great morning to be a RWDB when you consider the alternatives.

      Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 05 24 at 02:52 AM • permalink


Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.