Talk:Cinema Rex fire

Article complete

Article complete. If you believe any part of the article is lacking, please feel free to make necessary edits or simply send me a message. --QajarCoffee 23:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

problem with claim of radical islamists setting fire

This quote from the article suggests The Mantle of the Prophet agrees Islamists set the fire

There are a few documented reasons why the Cinema Rex fire was planned and executed by Islamist militants. For one, the incident was seen as a strategic move that would essentially mobilize the masses in support of the revolutionary push. Up until the fire, the revolutionary movement involved more politically active citizens but according to Roy Mottahedeh, author of The Mantle of the Prophet, “thousands of Iranians who had felt neutral and had until now thought that the struggle was only between the shah and supporters of religiously conservative mullahs felt that the government might put their own lives on the block to save itself. Suddenly, for hundreds of thousands, the movement was their own business.”

This is what the book says on p.375: "Regardless of who set the fire (perhaps no one) many people believed that the circumstances confirmed the government's guilt, and suddenly thousands of Iranians who had felt neutral and had until now thought that the struggle was only between the shah and supporters of religiously conservative mullahs felt that the government might put their own lives on the block to save itself. Suddenly, for hundreds of thousands, the movement was their own business.”

The claim should not stay without proof. --Leroy65X 22:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

So far as I can tell, the only proof offered that Islamists were behind the fire is one sentence from an article ("One person's story: Mr. Monir Taheri." Boroumand Foundation. Retrieved on 2006-08-21) on how Captain Monir Taheri was unjustly convicted and executed for arson.

“In his defense statement, the principal defendant admitted to having started the fire along with three other religious activists and denied having had connections with the former regime’s security apparatus.” --Leroy65X 01:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

A recent article by Daniel L. Byman (of the Brookings Insitution and Georgetown University) in the Washington Post mentions that Shi'i Islamist Revolutionaries were the arsonists - so that's a claim in an American newspaper of record that the Islamists were behind it. I put the article link and a few quotes from it on the main page. --theancientmariner7 23:34, 2 June 2006, Central Time.

Rename

Like there are "bombings" not "Bombings". --84.234.60.154 (talk) 12:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

This article lacks concrete evidence that Islamist Revolutionaries were behind the fire. It does state the lone confession of an arsonist without actually backing it up with support. Yes there have been various claims by anti governmental (against the current government) groups that Islamists, and not the SAVAK, were behind the fire. However there is a clear lack of evidence. Yet this article states that Islamists were behind the fire as if it is undeniable fact. Instead, unless more compelling evidence can be cited, it should say that there is debate over the arsonists, with some blaming the SAVAK and others the revolutionaries.