Picture(s) of the day: This is how it starts
By AcademicElephant Posted in Contra Tyrannum — Comments (17) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
An addendum to BooBooKitty's Diary
Of course, such a policy is not really new. Totalitarian regimes are rarely original in their propaganda. They prefer to adapt established traditions in order to give their activities a thin veneer of legitimacy. It turns out that the first such marking of Jews with yellow clothing took place in the early 9th century, and the practice continued on and off until the 18th century. Similar devices were used to differentiate Muslims as well. In 1781, the Hapsburg emperor Joseph II issued the Edict of Tolerance banning the use of such badges, and many other Enlightenment rulers followed suit. But of course the practice was viciously revived by the Third Reich in the 20th century. The results were cataclysmic.
Despite their disingenuous protestations that the Holocaust never happened, the Iranian regime knows this tragic history perfectly well. Only they don't think it's tragic. They think it's a plan. Their "new" law is no coincidence. It is a historically-informed and deliberate statement of intent.
So perhaps a quick history lesson on the Iranians' model would be in order.
This is how it starts:
This is how they're used:
And this is how it ends when the badges, having served their purpose, are no longer needed:
Any questions?
« "CIBD" — Comments (7) | What to do with a problem like Cuba — Comments (30) »
Picture(s) of the day: This is how it starts 17 Comments (0 topical, 17 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Nevermind all that benefit of the doubt stuff I was involved in yesterday.
I am very interested in how this is going to play out in the wider middle east, will we see ruffled feathers or shrugging shoulders, these are the types of social issues we need to be attacking on the international stage, this is the type of issue that can really shine the light on the tyranical nature of these guys, we need to be actually using the leverage we have with places like Saudi Arabia to condemn these types of action, outright, and excuse the self-rightious nature of this comment, but perhaps we can begin to put back together our shattered standing on the international stage...sloooooowly
Where killing a few thousands will save hundreds of thousands - possibly millions- and liberate millions more.
Fascists and fanatics make that kind of tragic calculus inevitable.
government would make the leap from simply identifying people's background to murdering them?
What a racist contention.
That sort of thing has never been done anywhere. Everyone knows that. I don't know where you got those photoshopped pictures but shame on you.
The poor Iranian government. They just try to be a mainstream country with stuff like electricity from nuclear power and identify who's living in their country and they get accused of all sorts of unfriendly things.
Although being "ironic" would probably be a better term.
Remember the big deal just a few weeks ago when President Abdingkaouaudde came out and said the holocaust never happened. That sort of dies down and he's got people breaking out yellow stars.
I haven't looked real hard, but I've not heard any mention of this.
If "fake but true" is your way of saying "truthy"....
Yes, I know you're talking about Rather.
Anyway, does anyone have any cites for this besides the National Post?
Why? Why are we conservatives so upset about a fanatical Muslim government mistreating a vulnerable minority?
In addition to church bombings, Christian shop owners selling alcohol have been targeted by groups trying to enforce Islamic laws.
Stores selling music tapes and CDs, mostly owned by Christian merchants, have also been firebombed and their owners told to stop "corrupting Islamic society".
In 2004, leaflets were left at the homes of Christian families warning the "men of the households" to adhere to Islamic law and ensure that women were dressed "conservatively", which often refers to Islamic attire.
Young Christian women have reported harassment and intimidation in the streets to don veils or scarves to cover their hair.
Fayrouz Hancock, an Iraq-Australian computer programmer now living in the US, says Iraqi Christians are fleeing "because of the difficulties of practising their faith and leading normal social lives in a country that has turned conservative due to the threats from extremists".
She also blames the breakdown in security in the country.
In early May, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) warned that religiously motivated attacks signalled "an exodus that may mean the end of the presence in Iraq of ancient Christian and other communities that have lived on those same lands for 2,000 years".
Christians are getting pounded in Iraq, and the reaction of conservatives reading this post is to hate me for bringing it up. We have a major military force in Iraq for the love of God, and we can't seem to do a blessed thing about anti-Christian persecution. But we ignore that, because it would make a Republican administration look bad, and instead get bent out of shape over a clothing requirement for the extremely small Jewish population of Iran?
Yes, the yellow star is an outrage. I encourage everyone to denounce it. But couldn't we muster just a little bit of desire to protect Christians for a change as well?
Where were all of you great conservatives when the Copts were rioting for their rights after a murder perpetrated in one of their churches? Where was all this outrage when Bill Clinton was bombing Christians in Serbia over trumped up charges of genocide?
I understand that American Christians are wracked with guilt over the Holocaust for some reason which I just can't quite fathom. After all, the crime was committed by Germans on a foreign continent. It isn't the problem with me that we, as conservative Americans, are interested in preventing another Holocaust, but couldn't we manage some kind of actual concern about Christians?
Put it in a diary ... but make sure you document all of your assertions.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=aD9nbnnIbZSQ
We still only have that one source on this...
This story was deemed not credible. The National Post retracted this piece as it has now been proven to have come from an UNRELIABLE source.