Iran may require non-Muslims to wear colored badges

[Veiled Princess 1]

The question I would want to ask would be, what is the purpose of having them wear those badges?, IF there's any truth to it. Does Saudi Arabia not issue different color visas based on religion?

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

i didn't get a visa when i was in saudi arabia........

[Veiled Princess 1]

i didn't get a visa when i was in saudi arabia........

How did you get into the country then?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The question I would want to ask would be, what is the purpose of having them wear those badges?, IF there's any truth to it. Does Saudi Arabia not issue different color visas based on religion?

To single out infadels. See Hitler and the Jews.

Next question.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The question I would want to ask would be, what is the purpose of having them wear those badges?, IF there's any truth to it. Does Saudi Arabia not issue different color visas based on religion?

To single out infadels. See Hitler and the Jews.

Next question.

Funny you should mention Hitler and the Jews, and "singling out the infidels." Because I'll bet you didn't realize that Israel does the same thing. Israeli national ID cards, issued to both Israelis and West Bank/Gaza Palestinians, clearly state "religion" (as either Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Druze, etc.) and "ethnic nationality" (as either Jewish, Arab, Druze, etc.)

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Since this thread was based on an article that has since been shown to be inaccurate, I am requesting that this thread be locked.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

i didn't get a visa when i was in saudi arabia........

How did you get into the country then?

part of desert storm no visa required i guess

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Since this thread was based on an article that has since been shown to be inaccurate, I am requesting that this thread be locked.

Now that the damage is done, hurry up and bury it before too many people get the message that this was a bogus report ? That's kind of like what the Nat'l Post did, no ?

[iceyspots 0]

EXPOSED!

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

[Veiled Princess 1]

The question I would want to ask would be, what is the purpose of having them wear those badges?, IF there's any truth to it. Does Saudi Arabia not issue different color visas based on religion?

To single out infadels. See Hitler and the Jews.

Next question.

I don't think so. I'm sure it's for some other reason. Like maybe so those non muslims are not required to follow Islamic law that the muslims abide by like covering and praying and things like that.

Hopefully that does not mean that they are going to start allowing non muslims to act like they would if they were here and walk around half naked in public and stuff. That can't be good for any society.

I'm glad got my opinion in before it was locked

i didn't get a visa when i was in saudi arabia........

How did you get into the country then?

part of desert storm no visa required i guess

I just looked into it again and it's not the visa that is colored it's the Iqama (residency permit) that is issued if you're there living and working.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

while I don't condone (or even read for that matter) the Nat'l Posts articles, it would still behoove the other news agencies who followed it to maybe check their sources before they print it or put it on a TV ticker!

Its not the first, nor the last time, that something like this has happened. And unfortunately for the world, no one will remember the retraction, they'll always remember that Iran is making non-Muslims wear badges and that all the 19 terrorists of 9/11 came from Canada. People would rather be angry about something, even if its false.

Watch though... I bet the whole badges issue has some truth to it. Iran's president already wants to wipe Israel off the map. Why would a badge be so far fetched.

But the story is untrue. Seizing on it as fact merely validates what you already believe about that country, which the government and our media has done a good job of demonizing.

Do I think this law is uncharacteristic of Iran's president - no, but you can't go around believing something with no factual basis.

In this case - certain elements of the media are directly at fault. Its suggestive of bad reporting standards - some editor clearly thought that shock value (regardless of factuality) would sell more papers. Obviously it does...

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

it is bush's fault!

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

it is bush's fault!

of course it is

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

it is bush's fault!

Hmmmm don't believe I said that. The government certainly has an interest in perpetuating a negative image of Iran seeing as they are trying to halt Iran's nuclear energy programme. Let me add that Iran hasn't actually done anything illegal in this regard - they haven't done anything whatsoever that violates international law or the NPT. The US by contrast, has blatantly flouted the NPT by stockpiling nuclear weapons and by developing 'nuclear bunker busters' and threatening to use them on targets within Iran.

A counterpoint for you Buying the Bush line on Iran nukes

Of course that's quite apart from this one story - fault for which lies entirely with the editor of the publications who reported something as fact, which was unverified and ultimately untrue.