Iran taking notes from the Nazis

MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
Iran eyes badges for Jews
Law would require non-Muslim insignia


Chris Wattie, National Post
Published: 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."
Click to expand...

source and more

_40754411_star_203_ap.jpg
 
HomeLAN said:
But we're OK with this mentality having nukes at their disposal, right?
Click to expand...

We were not OK with the assumption that them trying to have nuclear reactors for power immediately meant that they must be going for nuclear weapons and therefore had to be attacked...using nuclear weapons, no less.
The hypocrisy of the whole thing was giving me headaches.

**
Back to thread - Kick out the Iranian ambassadors, turn off the outbound oil taps, close off trade...wait a few weeks and watch them turn over and ask to come back to the negotiations table.
 
Usually I am agaisnt war etc.

But in this case...

Even though everyone has to wear some kind of identifying mark, why is that so it will be easier to seperate them later once they get the death camps going?

Paranoid? Maybe, but people thought people were paranoid about Germany 65 years ago.
 
MrBishop said:
We were not OK with the assumption that them trying to have nuclear reactors for power immediately meant that they must be going for nuclear weapons and therefore had to be attacked
Click to expand...

Given the history and personalities involved there, any other assumption is so fucking polly-anna as to be criminally negligent.

That IS the thread, bubba. If they weren't enriching uranium, not terribly much of this would be pressing. But, you have a psychotic government with a history of viewing civilians as valid targets pursuing nuclear arms just as fast as they can. All your aeticle does is point up that they aren't very nice people.

For God's sake, don't do anything about it, though. Somebody might get hurt.
 
Sorry to sideline the conversation, but in cases like this, I always like to look back at the past. Would anyone like to know how long it took for any country that developed it's own reactor "for power" to produce it's first fully functional nuclear weapon? Go ahead and look that up. Lots of countries have bought nuclear reactors, but take a look at the list of countries that developed their own reactors, and didn't produce a weapon within the decade. Short ass list, isn't it?
 
Professur said:
Sorry to sideline the conversation, but in cases like this, I always like to look back at the past. Would anyone like to know how long it took for any country that developed it's own reactor "for power" to produce it's first fully functional nuclear weapon? Go ahead and look that up. Lots of countries have bought nuclear reactors, but take a look at the list of countries that developed their own reactors, and didn't produce a weapon within the decade. Short ass list, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Doubly so because it is Iran.

Is there any question as to the motives of a country that is sitting upon 1/5 of the worlds oil desiring nuclear energy? Would it be delivering state of the art nuclear power at three times the cost of its existing oil or making weapons grade uranium for bombs to help protect the psychotic theocratic regime?
 
MrBishop said:
We were not OK with the assumption that them trying to have nuclear reactors for power immediately meant that they must be going for nuclear weapons
Click to expand...

A country, sitting on top of 10% of the worlds oil, doesn't need nuclear power.

The Shah wasn't such a dick head after all. 'eh.
 
Ever since Carter allowed him to be deposed, look at the ME. You be the judge.

Sorry chcr, in the end, it's all Carters fault.
 
Gonz said:
Ever since Carter allowed him to be deposed, look at the ME. You be the judge.

Sorry chcr, in the end, it's all Carters fault.
Click to expand...
The seeds of destruction are well before Carter or any American involvement. The living memory failings go back to the WW2 British. Historical failings go back to... gag... what?... the Old Testament?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top