Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Bogus Iran story in keeping with Next Hitler™ framework

Posted by Joshua Holland at 2:22 PM on May 23, 2006.


Yellow stars for Iranian Jews?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get The Mix in your
mailbox!

 

A bogus story first appearing in Canada's National Post spread around the world this weekend:

The National Post newspaper quoted human rights groups as saying that Iran's parliament passed a law this week setting a public dress code and requiring non-Muslims to wear special insignia.

Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians would be forced to wear a yellow, red or blue strip of cloth, respectively, on the front of their clothes, it said.

But the whole thing was complete bullshit:

IRAN'S only Jewish MP strongly denied reports in a Canadian newspaper overnight that Iran may force non-Muslims to wear coloured badges in public so they can be identified.

"This report is a complete fabrication and is totally false," Maurice Motammed said in Tehran. "It is a lie, and the people who invented it wanted to make political gain" by doing so.

The story was pushed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, whose penchant for backing-up right-wing fabrications has made it -- in my mind -- no longer a credible source.

The guy who wrote the Post article, Amir Taheri, is a writer for, among other pubs, the National Review and Murdoch's New York Post. The National Post retracted the article hours after it was posted to their site, and blamed Taheri for the bad info.

Taheri's pimped repped by Benador Associates, a public relations firm that has all the leading neocon nutcases.

Jim Lobe of IPS wrote the following of Benador (via Sourcewatch):

When historians look back on the United States war in Iraq, they will almost certainly be struck by how a small group of mainly neo-conservative analysts and activists outside the administration were able to shape the US media debate in ways that made the drive to war so much easier than it might have been… But historians would be negligent if they ignored the day-to-day work of one person who, as much as anyone outside the administration, made their media ubiquity possible. Meet Eleana Benador, the Peruvian-born publicist for Perle, Woolsey, Michael Ledeen, Frank Gaffney and a dozen other prominent neo-conservatives whose hawkish opinions proved very hard to avoid for anyone who watched news talk shows or read the op-ed pages of major newspapers over the past 20 months.

Benador also reps Judy Miller.

So here we go again, with the same crackpots coming out of the woodwork to make Iran the next Nazi Germany. What remains to be seen is how many suckers there are out there who will fall for the same trick twice.

Digg!

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.


On the religious right 'nuts,' liberals, and catching a break
A response to a colleague...
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 17, 2006.
Bush thinking of 'replacing' Iraqi government? [VIDEO]
A whole new definition of Democracy.
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 16, 2006.
Religious right rally's first gaffe
Church opposes bigoted agenda
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 16, 2006.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The NY Post ran the story after it was already discredited.
Posted by: lamar on May 23, 2006 2:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I heard the story on the radio, then read how people in Iran were saying that the story was false. The next day, the NY Post ran the story (after it was discredited). Our newspapers know better, they just don't give a damn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All the better...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on May 23, 2006 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... to direct your attention away from your own rights being taken away by your own government, my dear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is nothing new ... check this out ...
Posted by: kbartoy on May 23, 2006 2:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Limited Imagination of the Neo-Conservative

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iran a problem - no way!
Posted by: jonwilson on May 23, 2006 8:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"... to direct your attention away from your own rights being taken away by your own government, my dear." JoshuaLudd

Ya, why worry about a guy who wants to wipe Israel off the map and who is trying to build a nuclear bomb?

I am sure he won't be a problem.

We need to worry about the real bad guy, Bush - even though he will be out of office soon.

Don't you agree Neville Chamberlain?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

will the new 21st century neo nazis please stand up!
Posted by: saywhat? on May 23, 2006 10:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it looks like i'm a mad man, no why, it's alfred e neuman and the baby faced pudges!!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another chilling Nazi Comparison
Posted by: tanstaafl28 on May 24, 2006 1:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's a rather chilling comparison between The U.S.A. Patriot Act and The Nazi Enabling Act of 1933

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like it or not, Taheri might be correct
Posted by: goldmarx on May 24, 2006 2:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why would anybody have to MAKE Iran look like the next Nazi Germany when the President of Iran has threatened repeatedly to exterminate Israel? He doesn't need any help to paint a Charlie Chaplin moustache on himself, eh?

Unfortunately, Taheri's story has the ring of truth. After the alleged 'discreditings', Taheri rebounded yesterday, standing by his story and referring to his sources as three dissidents on the legislative body that initially passed the 'colored badges' measures.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» yes, the ring of truth Posted by: brasilaron
» RE: yes, the ring of truth Posted by: kryptx
More History?
Posted by: douglashoyt on May 24, 2006 7:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it optimistically assumed that after a war in IRAN there will be any more history?

An Iranian/USA war may be the last war of human history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

why not put this episode of demonization in context with all the other demonizations from the past?
Posted by: cry0fan on May 24, 2006 7:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just go look at www.loc.gov and www.archive.org for all the other similar demonizations from decades past, wars past, administrations past, and even from other countries.

This is nothing new. Go look at how we demonized the enemy in WW2, in WW1, and how the other side demonized us! Look at Iraq, and how we demonized in 2003, AND in the early 90s in the run up to Desert Storm.

If you really wanted to tell the truth, you show that this is something that is part of a BIG PICTURE. But your goal is not to expose the entire overclass, but instead you just play your part in the shadow play that substitutes for real politics. Exposing the overclass manipulations by putting the Iran demonization in context with all the demonizations of the past would hurt your particular branch of the overclass, the Democratic party.

Not to mention the fact that providing context of past demonizations would not help you with your nonprofit benefactors that are funded by that same overclass....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in reply to holland
Posted by: cry0fan on May 24, 2006 11:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I seem to not be able to reply directly to Holland's reply to me, so here is his reply:



Yes, nothing pisses off our overclass overlords more than stating the incredibly obvious.


Oh, I see! It's all just so obvious....



Thank God we have people like you who still have the courage to do so. You're a hero of the proletariat!



I am not a socialist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No. Posted by: Longdream
Even without considering the sources,
Posted by: Longdream on May 24, 2006 7:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
anyone who swallows this one whole and doesn't ask himself if it couldn't possibly be designed to get us in the mood for a little bomb party should maybe drop by my house to pick up a few bridge bonds, cheap at half the price.

Remember Colin Powell, back when we still bothered with the U.N., with his pointer and his trucks and his men talking in Arabic on the phone which all turned out to be full-baked, primo horseshit? Remember Chalabi? Remember Rice, that whoring waste of higher education, and her absolute, in-your-teeth lying, over and over again? Remember Barbara Boxer, calling her down?

Anyone who doesn't want to remember isn't going to get off so easy this time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]