Because of my earlier comment, I assume I'm included in "you guys." If you mean you *love* me because ideological "blinders" incline me to assume the worst regarding the theocratic Iranian regime, and that this leads me (as it may have done in the dress code case) to condemn Iran based on incorrect specific evidence (although by all initial appearances the story was legitimate), then I think in general you are right. This is certainly my bias. On the other hand, if you somehow mean this as an ironic defense of the Iranian regime, whose crimes and behavior toward its own citizens and threats against others is well documented, unchallenged and often trumpeted by the Iranians themselves, then I think you've clearly lost the magic touch.
You are welcome to post comments with or without logging in.
Logging in does not get you any more content but it does give you lists of content
you haven't seen yet.
We will not give out your email address.
If you want others to be able to contact you privately, include your email address in your signature.
Love?
Because of my earlier comment, I assume I'm included in "you guys." If you mean you *love* me because ideological "blinders" incline me to assume the worst regarding the theocratic Iranian regime, and that this leads me (as it may have done in the dress code case) to condemn Iran based on incorrect specific evidence (although by all initial appearances the story was legitimate), then I think in general you are right. This is certainly my bias. On the other hand, if you somehow mean this as an ironic defense of the Iranian regime, whose crimes and behavior toward its own citizens and threats against others is well documented, unchallenged and often trumpeted by the Iranians themselves, then I think you've clearly lost the magic touch.