Woulda, coulda, shoulda, whatever.

Over here, Chester takes the high road in terms of journalistic accuracy:

[Update: Dr. Dawg (and others) have made the point that this isn't really confirmed enough to pass on. I'll leave it up, but under erasure. If it turns out to be false, I'll pass that along too.]

Frankly, I'm not sure why Chester's so worried about this when the commenters at SDA are more than happy to show us how it works:

Jeremiah:

Whether or not the story was false or not, the fact remains that Jews are targeted by the Iranian government as enemies. One need only to review the rantings of that President of theirs to confirm the government's intention. The fact that he has stated in public on many occasions that Israel should be "removed from the face of the earth" is more than telling.

Yes, the general line of thinking here is definitely biased. Biased in favor of human rights,dignity and truth. Your specious comments would be amusing, if it were not for the Jews that are being persecuted by you and your fellow travelers. If the comments on this blog cause you to think they are biased, then you are absolutly correct. Biased in the way of truth, justice and decency toward all mankind.

Posted by: Rattfuc at April 23, 2007 5:59 PM

In other words, it's not really important that the Iranian government never actually passed a law to make Jews wear identifying badges. What's important is that they could have. Just as it's not relevant whether Sarah Palin referred to Barack Obama as "Sambo." So what if she didn't? She could have. And that's all that matters.

Just ask Rattfuc.