Yes, I read it. But when I'm trying to establish someone's veracity, I don't just check back with them to see if they still say they're right. I check the facts. And the facts just don't bear out Tahiri's story.

But that doesn't seem to be your style. Tell you what, here you go. I'm telling you the truth. I'm telling you the truth. I'm telling you the truth. There, now you have to believe me, if you use the same criteria you're applying to Tahiri.

I forgive you. Now, do you really think that someone who lies about the situation in Iran should be consulted by the White House as an expert on the situation in Iraq? Ever think about answering that particular question, or are do you just plan to dance around it some more?

My apologies, I read it too fast, and concentrated more on "expert" than "Iraq".

Taheri's original statement was that the law was passed by one sector of Iranian government. He then went on to speculate what the law would consist of. The righty papers ran with his comment as if it was law and as if the the speculated part was already a part of it. Taheri included too much speculation in his original article but it's the fault of the righty papers for getting it wrong.

This article from Assyrians in Iran summarizes it well. The law is to institute the nature of Islamic dress, not to differentiate non-Muslims. Which it already does; if you are a woman in Iran you will be heavily scrutinized for acceptably Muslim costume. They just want to do it more.

Dare to unwrap your womenfolk.

Not a germane question until you show me where Taheri lied. His words, not third-hand commentary. Until then it's question-begging (in the petitio principii sense).

Essentially on target, although I'd characterize it differently from "speculation"...he's describing what his sources inside the Majlis told him about what the "consensus" was likely to consist of...at least before the brouhaha.

As I read it, the law actualy reifies ahead of time the "consensus of a committee that consists of members from the Ministry of Islamic Orientation, the Ministry of Commerce and the Cultural Subcommittee of the Islamic Majlis" with final approval by Khamenei...the lawmaking as such is already done.

It's just so convenient having an official state religion, you can incorporate such a pronoucement by reference in law retroactively without having to actually legislate again.

I'm on it. ;)

No . The idea of men unwrapping 'their' womenfolk is just as bad as the idea of men wrapping up their womenfolk . Women should be the ones to decide to wrap or unwrap themselves . Full stop .

Not to worry, that is part of what warch was saying. She is sufficiently progressive.

Or each other. Now that's progressive.

Excellent , MaggieL ! I keep meaning to go , and someone makes me laugh again . And I stay , and stay , and stay ....

i believe there are 12-Step Meetings for this now. One day at at time, brother! One day at a time!

My life is more in the two-step / foxtrot line , Brianna .

And that is why you should stay.

After a few days you won't be making 70 posts a day. It will roll back to a more reasonable maintenance level of addiction. Really. We've all been there.

I wish.