Sayhey
May 24, 2006, 10:45 PM
I haven't kept up with all the posting here for a little while, so forgive me if this is duplicated somewhere. I recall reading a story not so long ago about a plan in Iran to force non-muslims to wear distinctive colors to identify them in public. This, of course, recalls the days of Nazi Germany and the forcing of German Jews to wear a yellow star of David symbol. Sounds horrible, but it turns out it was all untrue. Now, who would be putting out disinformation about Iran and comparing their deplorable leadership to Hitler? The drumbeats of war are getting louder.
...And, by Saturday, other papers were following up on the National Post’s scoop. The New York Post’s Saturday front page, for example, blared, “FOURTH REICH — Iran law labels Jews.”
But the story was already collapsing. Indeed, it had collapsed the day before, long before the Post went to press — as the article itself hinted way down in the text’s eighth paragraph, where it noted “conflicting accounts” about the “national uniform code.”
These conflicting accounts apparently generated the neoconservative-oriented New York Sun’s more cautious headline, “Scramble Is On To Confirm Report Iran Wants Jews to Wear Badges.”
Both papers cited Canada’s new Prime Minister John Harper and Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who denounced Iran based on the report at a joint press conference in Ottawa — though both men said they did not know if the report was true.
But within hours after the National Post of Canada hit the streets Friday morning, it became clear the story had serious problems. By 7:41 a.m., a Montreal news radio station, AM940, had an interview with Israeli Iran expert Meir Javedanfar of Middle East Economic and Political Analysis debunking it.
“It’s absolutely factually incorrect,” he told the station. “Nowhere in the law is there any talk of Jews and Christians having to wear different colors. The Iranian people would never stand for it. The Iranian government wouldn’t be stupid enough to do it.”
Javedanfar told The Jewish Week he spent “about 40 minutes” talking to sources in and outside of Iran and, more importantly, getting the text of the legislation off the Internet. His review of the extensive parliamentary debate of the bill, also available online, showed that such a proposal was not even part of the discussion.
Indeed, the law’s text and parliamentary debate, available in English from the BBC Service, discloses no provision mandating that any Iranians will have to wear any kind of prescribed dress. It instead focuses on promoting “traditional” clothing designs “using Iranian and Islamic patterns” by Iran’s domestic fashion industry and preventing “the import of clothes incompatible with cultural Islamic and national values.”
The law is meant to develop and protect Iran’s clothing industry, Javedanfar said.
There were other problems with Taheri’s story. Among other things, it contains extensive remarks on the legislation from a man named Mostafa Pourhardani, described as “Minister of Islamic Orientation.”
But, as first pointed out in a comment on the Just Adventure Forum Web site, Iran’s government has no ministry by that name. It does have a Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. But its minister is Mohammad Hossein Saffar Harandi. Google searches for the name “Mostafa Pourhardani” in English and Persian turn up only hits stemming from Taheri’s article.
Repeated efforts to contact Taheri were unsuccessful. But the following day, he issued a statement via Benador saying reports based on his story had “jumped the gun.” The religious clothing restrictions he described earlier as part of the law were, he now said, “ideas under discussion.”
Denials of the National Post story also started pouring in from official Iranian sources. Within hours of its appearance, wire services reports cited denials of the National Post’s allegations from the law’s parliamentary sponsor, the parliament’s designated Jewish member and a diplomat with Iran’s U.N. mission.
The cumulative force of this information compelled the National Post to run a retraction on its Web site later that same Friday.
Still, many of the follow-up stories clung to claims that a proposal to mandate special clothes for religious minorities had been discussed as part of the legislation at some earlier point. Many Jewish groups, including the Wiesenthal Center and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, supported this claim. Javedanfar said he heard “rumors” of such a proposal two years ago and had sought — but failed — to find any evidence for them at the time.
Jewish Week (http://thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=12511) emphasis added
...And, by Saturday, other papers were following up on the National Post’s scoop. The New York Post’s Saturday front page, for example, blared, “FOURTH REICH — Iran law labels Jews.”
But the story was already collapsing. Indeed, it had collapsed the day before, long before the Post went to press — as the article itself hinted way down in the text’s eighth paragraph, where it noted “conflicting accounts” about the “national uniform code.”
These conflicting accounts apparently generated the neoconservative-oriented New York Sun’s more cautious headline, “Scramble Is On To Confirm Report Iran Wants Jews to Wear Badges.”
Both papers cited Canada’s new Prime Minister John Harper and Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who denounced Iran based on the report at a joint press conference in Ottawa — though both men said they did not know if the report was true.
But within hours after the National Post of Canada hit the streets Friday morning, it became clear the story had serious problems. By 7:41 a.m., a Montreal news radio station, AM940, had an interview with Israeli Iran expert Meir Javedanfar of Middle East Economic and Political Analysis debunking it.
“It’s absolutely factually incorrect,” he told the station. “Nowhere in the law is there any talk of Jews and Christians having to wear different colors. The Iranian people would never stand for it. The Iranian government wouldn’t be stupid enough to do it.”
Javedanfar told The Jewish Week he spent “about 40 minutes” talking to sources in and outside of Iran and, more importantly, getting the text of the legislation off the Internet. His review of the extensive parliamentary debate of the bill, also available online, showed that such a proposal was not even part of the discussion.
Indeed, the law’s text and parliamentary debate, available in English from the BBC Service, discloses no provision mandating that any Iranians will have to wear any kind of prescribed dress. It instead focuses on promoting “traditional” clothing designs “using Iranian and Islamic patterns” by Iran’s domestic fashion industry and preventing “the import of clothes incompatible with cultural Islamic and national values.”
The law is meant to develop and protect Iran’s clothing industry, Javedanfar said.
There were other problems with Taheri’s story. Among other things, it contains extensive remarks on the legislation from a man named Mostafa Pourhardani, described as “Minister of Islamic Orientation.”
But, as first pointed out in a comment on the Just Adventure Forum Web site, Iran’s government has no ministry by that name. It does have a Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. But its minister is Mohammad Hossein Saffar Harandi. Google searches for the name “Mostafa Pourhardani” in English and Persian turn up only hits stemming from Taheri’s article.
Repeated efforts to contact Taheri were unsuccessful. But the following day, he issued a statement via Benador saying reports based on his story had “jumped the gun.” The religious clothing restrictions he described earlier as part of the law were, he now said, “ideas under discussion.”
Denials of the National Post story also started pouring in from official Iranian sources. Within hours of its appearance, wire services reports cited denials of the National Post’s allegations from the law’s parliamentary sponsor, the parliament’s designated Jewish member and a diplomat with Iran’s U.N. mission.
The cumulative force of this information compelled the National Post to run a retraction on its Web site later that same Friday.
Still, many of the follow-up stories clung to claims that a proposal to mandate special clothes for religious minorities had been discussed as part of the legislation at some earlier point. Many Jewish groups, including the Wiesenthal Center and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, supported this claim. Javedanfar said he heard “rumors” of such a proposal two years ago and had sought — but failed — to find any evidence for them at the time.
Jewish Week (http://thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=12511) emphasis added
