The Iran ‘Jew badge’ story - “pre-war propaganda?”

Jim Henley, Steve Taylor, and James Joyner have all commented on this.

Start with Henley (clearly a Leftie*):

They made it up. Taheri and The Post ran a provably false report, on their own initiative or at the behest of some publicity-shy agency of some government or other, played in as inflammatory way as possible. Why? So that months from now, someone hearing about plans to bomb Iran, or seeing footage of bombing on TV, will say to themselves, “Didn’t I read that Iran was going to round up all the Jews and make them wear yellow stars like the Nazis? Something like that. Well, good riddance.” All the story had to do was live long enough to get into circulation.

Henley also notes that there is no Iranian “Mostafa Pourhardani, Minister of Islamic Orientation.”

Joyner:

It’s classic pre-war propaganda.

Taylor notes the above comments, presumably with concurrence, adding:

That isn’t a comforting thought.

I don’t know what to make of this. The story is false;it has no basis in fact. Nonetheless,it originated somewhere, with someone; unless there is journalistic abiogenesis. “Some government or other …” Let’s not be coy; Henley implies the U.S. and/or Israel. Is that what’s really going on here? I suppose it’s possible, but I can’t default to the position that the CIA and/or Mossad is behind every item of (potentially advantageous) misinformation that gets big media play.

Anyway, I will do my bit to annoy my Neocon and Zionist masters by repeating that there is no truth to the rumors that Iran plans to force Jews, Christians, and other religious minorities to wear identifying clothing.

*Jim Henley and his readers describe him as a guy “who has his own meme/cares about civil liberties.” He has posted several items recently critical of U.S. policy and statements towards Iran, whatever classification or meme that might put him in.

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Iran yellow-badges fallout: Amir Taheri comments on 22 May 2006 at 6:59 pm

    […] The New York Sun follows up by quoting another prominent Iranian exile, Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi, as corroborating Taheri’s account, for whatever that’s worth at this point. The question at this hour: if the story really is “classic pre-war propaganda,” which, oh which, unspecified government could be behind such a dastardly deed? […]

  2. Non Partisan Pundit on 22 May 2006 at 8:19 pm

    Beware the Exiles…

    Updated The recent controversy surrounding the Iranian “dress code” law got me thinking about the role of exiles in creating policy and influencing public opinion. The “dress code” story was published last week by Canada’s National Post described an Ir…

  3. By the Way § Unqualified Offerings on 23 May 2006 at 12:15 am

    […] than a lower-medium-time blogger but at least I’ve got my own meme. Posted by Jim Henley @ 11:14 pm, Filed under: Main « « The World Is Not Only Stranger Than We Know . . . | Main| […]

  4. Modulator on 23 May 2006 at 2:47 am

    Confusion Cleared…

    Henley is a leftie….it’s his meme. It is possible to read a single brief post at many sites and determine the author’s point on the political spectrum fairly accurately. But some, like Henley, are just a bit more complex and prove the point that if…

Comments

  1. Davebo wrote:

    “Start with Henley (clearly a Leftie):”

    Wow! Talk about being politically tone deaf!

    If you think Henley is a “leftie” then you obviously haven’t been paying attention.

    “Nonetheless,it originated somewhere, with someone”

    Well that seals it. If you don’t know by now where the story originated then you DEFINATELY didn’t pay attention.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 4:28 pm

  2. commissar wrote:

    Davebo,

    I never read Henley before; I just looked at this one post and his blogroll. Seems like a Leftie to me. Am I wrong?

    So where DID the story originate? You seem to know. CIA? Mossad? Rummy himself?

    “DEFINATELY???” - Trolls get more cred when they can spell.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 4:38 pm

  3. The Sanity Inspector wrote:

    Henley has been very critical of the various alarums raised against Iran’s nuclear program for some time now. He once disputed with me Rafsanjani’s statement on the feasability of nuking Israel, insisting that to read ill intentions towards Israel from that is just neocon projection.

    And yes, he’s a lib. A smart and funny one, but a lib nonetheless.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 4:57 pm

  4. Davebo wrote:

    Henley is and has long been a libertarian.

    And the story originated with…. it’s author! Amir Taheri and his story in the National Post, as noted in Henley’s first sentence.

    And here you can see him “revising and extending” his past remarks.

    Oddly he doesn’t attempt to explain to us who Mostafa Pourhardani is supposed to be.

    For now we can only assume he’s a made up character in this made up story.

    And for the record, I can’t confirm that I’m spelling Pourhardani correctly as I can’t confirm the person exists at all.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 5:00 pm

  5. Davebo wrote:

    Henley is as much a liberal as Steven Bainbridge, Gregory Djerejian, Andrew Olmstead, and the dozens of other conservative and libertarian bloggers who’ve had the temerity to state the obvious.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 5:04 pm

  6. commissar wrote:

    I DEFINATELY should have said “instigate” rather than “originate.”

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 5:12 pm

  7. The Sanity Inspector wrote:

    My political taxonomy isn’t the best, so I’ll take your word for it. He’s no friend of Bush or the WOT, that’s for sure.

    None of my comments should be construed as agreement or disagreement with the Taheri article. Having fallen into a similar mire some time back on a different issue, I’ve held back commenting on this.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 5:16 pm

  8. Rick Moran wrote:

    What I find interesting about this story is that I have now read about 5 different versions of the law in question, none of which are in agreement.

    This is the denial of the story by a mid-east expert in Canada:

    [I]ndependent reporter Meir Javedanfar, an Israeli Middle East expert who was born and raised in Tehran, says the report is false. “It’s absolutely factually incorrect,” he told The New 940 Montreal. “Nowhere in the law is there any talk of Jews and Christians having to wear different colours. I’ve checked it with sources both inside Iran and outside.”

    Please note that he says “nowhere in the law…” What this tells me is that SOME kind of law regarding Islamic dress was passed. It might be helpful if someone could start from that premise and get to the truth of the matter.

    While clearly the badges part of the story has not been proven, why is it beyond imagining that a nation with roving gangs of fanatical religious police who beat women in the middle of the street in broad daylight for not being dressed properly would pass a law making it mandatory for non Muslims to dress differently?

    Some people are so eager to show that Ahmadinejad isn’t nutzo that they are willing to give the fanatic a pass. I happen to think that the guy is perfectly capable of anything we can imagine and that he and his country represent a very serious threat to the west.

    The jaw dropping reaction by some to his “letter” to President Bush that contained not one iota of a diplomatic opening and was instead a highly exaggerated, frighteningly myopic view of Bush, the United States, and the west proves that there will be some who will see any confrontation with this guy as beating the war drums.

    The Iranian government is scary enough - I doubt whether anyone in our government would need to plant a story like this in order to fan the flames for war.

    Posted 22 May 2006 at 7:54 pm

  9. Jon Hendry wrote:

    Rick Moran writes: “Please note that he says “nowhere in the law…” What this tells me is that SOME kind of law regarding Islamic dress was passed.”

    Not necessarily. “The law” is sometimes used as a reference to the body of law as a whole, not a specific law. For instance, you might say “Why can’t I whistle? It’s not against the law.” which is not taken to refer to a particular statute that bans *other* forms of bodily music production.

    Or consider “Is President Bush above the law?” - this *may* be posed in reference to a *particular* law Bush is ignoring, but probably is used in reference to any and all laws that Bush may choose to ignore, which may include a particular statute of interest, but with the implication that other laws are being violated or may be violated in the future.

    Posted 23 May 2006 at 12:58 am

  10. wade wrote:

    i’m a leftie, and i’m confident jim henley isn’t..

    Posted 23 May 2006 at 10:36 am

  11. Gary Farber wrote:

    Jim Henley has been blogging since 2001, and his political record is neither obscure nor mysterious. Jim is a fervent libertarian, with a taste for anarchism, and a hatred of socialism, and a consistently fervent opposition to government of all sorts, quite specifically and emphatically including “liberal big government.”

    The only possible definition of him as a “liberal” or “lefty” is one in which all opposition to various Bush policies, or to U.S. foreign military interventions, is so defined, which is simply silly, beyond simplistic, and ignorant, as well as knee-jerk.

    Jim has written about fifty billion posts over the last five years denouncing liberalism and any government beyond minarchy. It’s on those bases that he opposes most of Bushism and the Iraq war (though not so much the toppling of the Taliban). He’s a Cato Institute sort of guy, though he thinks they’re for too much government. A main thing he can’t stand about the Republicans is that they’re too leftist. (And a main reason he opposes the war in Iraq is because he believes governments aren’t competent to engage in such Big Government type interventions and policies.)

    Which makes most of the assumptions on display in this comment thread fairly hilarious.

    Posted 24 May 2006 at 4:56 pm

  12. matthew hogan wrote:

    Jim Henley is a leftie in the sense that Christopher Hitchens is a rightie.

    Posted 24 May 2006 at 5:56 pm

  13. commissar wrote:

    I am impressed by the vigor of Jim and his readers, on the matter of his political label or identification.

    Posted 24 May 2006 at 7:33 pm

« More fly porn
DANEgerus: RINO Sightings »