Talk:Cinema Rex fire

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on August 19, 2018.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Iran Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Firefighting This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefighting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to firefighting on Wikipedia! If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.FirefightingWikipedia:WikiProject FirefightingTemplate:WikiProject FirefightingFirefighting articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1978 Iranian politics, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

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)[reply]

User:Markus451: there is a problem with this line, "Nothing solidified the shah’s perceived guilt more so than that of Captain Monir Taheri’s trial" since the reader following the story wouldn't know that the shah had already fallen by the time of the trial. —Preceding undated comment was added at 04:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC).

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.”^[1]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.

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

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.

As far as I understand, there is no consensus over who set the fire. We need to rework this to make this more neutral. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The cinemas that were set alight during this time in Iran, all showed Farsi films which were condemned by the Mullahs as immoral, many of these showed lewd scenes of alcohol drinking and semi-clad Iranian women dancing.

See for instance this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLJL2R4zaTQ

Hossein Boroujerdi, one of the three people who delivered the chemical fuel to the city identifies Ali Khamenei (Iran’s supreme leader) as the person who ordered the firebombing and as the person who provided the chemicals. This information is documented in Boroujerdi’s book “Behind The Islamic Revolution’s curtains, Confessions of Hossein Boroujerdi” ISBN 3-93524966-7.

Strangely, Khamenei is said, with what veracity I do not know, to have married one of these singing and dancing actresses after he came to power. --Wool Bridge (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was not SAVAK. Whoever is saying SAVAK is * who is biased and probably have a personal problem against the Shah. I know there are a lot of people in the wiki who have written against the Shah because they hate him for trying to make Iran a great country. These are people who only want their own nation to exploit others.

Evidence:

• The life and times of the Shah, by Afkhami. Page 465, 459,
• Modern Iran: the Pahlavis and after, by Ali M. Ansari. Page 259
• Iran A Country Study, by Federal Research Division. Page 78
• Encyclopaedia of the Muslim World, by Taru Bahl, M.H. Syed. Page 105.
• Iran: a country study by Glenn Eldon Curtis,Library of Congress. Federal Research Division. Page 48

You see. In wikipedia, I have learned something. When it comes to Shah articles, if it's Anti-Shah or Anti-Shah period, then whatever evidence is OK. If it's pro Shah or pro- Shah period, then no then we have to go through fifty procedures. --Javidshahanshah (talk) 17:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that Wikipedia is not a forum and works based on reliable sources rather than personal opinions. The most authoritative book about 1979 Iranian revolution, Iran between two revolutions by Ervand Abrahamian, has made no mention to your claims. The book is somewhat old (1982) and maybe newer books can unveil more facts about the incident but I haven't seen any new references than definitely holds revolutionaries responsible for the fire (even online websites such as bbc.co.uk don't state anything explicitly). I have no access to your books and cannot confirm your statements but I suggest you to have a look at the Persian article that seems more NPOV than its English counterpart. AMERICOPHILE 00:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And yet nobody cares. Again, it proves the case that Wiki is not controlled by the regular people, but people with agenda to spread their own opinions and views.

In many articles related to the Shah of Iran and the Revolution; the other side of the story is never told. Why!?

Javidshahanshah (talk) 12:53, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the above WhisperToMe (talk) 06:09, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no.none of your sources are trustworthy,besides they r not independent at all.they will be removed.all iranians know this cuz it happened among our grandparants and they totally knew the story.ur sources r not independent and totally dependent to shah.find a reliable online source if u can,not a book that no one has even heard of..--jasmine (talk) 14:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I tracked the Byman source. It's a post on a think tank website: Byman, Daniel. "The Rise of Low-Tech Terrorism." Brookings Institute. May 6, 2007.

He doesn't say anything like "modern scholarship proves that Islamists did it" - For all we know, he could be taking the Shah's side. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In an interview documentary by Hossein Dehbashi (Iranian film director) with Islamic Republic Official, Mohsen Safaei Farahani (Iranian Politician), both of them clearly declared that this crime was done by anti Shah protestants. And Farahani says that those people after the revolution became The Parliament representatives! Farahani was in the new government of Iran for near 4 decades, he clearly says that after the people's insist for a court, they prepared a fake list of some old regime officials and simply killed them! Hope a WikiPedia without Iranian Cyber Army members, who are controlling most of WikiPedia Farsi in Iran, and it seems here too. Prove: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osaIUW7l0FE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc-XI0cQD5g OmidAriaMehr (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:34, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'Wool Bridge' wrote on this talk page with the title "The Campaign against the Immoral..." ,

He wrote: "Hossein Boroujerdi, one of the three people who delivered the chemical fuel to the city identifies Ali Khamenei (Iran’s supreme leader) as the person who ordered the firebombing and as the person who provided the chemicals. This information is documented in Boroujerdi’s book “Behind The Islamic Revolution’s curtains, Confessions of Hossein Boroujerdi” ISBN 3-93524966-7."

How can we get this into the article? Any good ideas?

Take care guys! --Tondar1 (talk) 16:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• Cinema rex burial 08.1978.png
• Hossein Takbalizadeh trial 1359.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:21, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• Abadan.net2.jpg (discussion)
• CinemaRexFire.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article puts this sentence in the header, but according to Wikipedia itself, the Cinema Rex fire was the largest terrorist attack until the 1990 massacre of Sri Lankan Police officers, not until 9/11. If there are no objections, I'm going to change the header to reflect this. Thanks. Stavd3 (talk) 17:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]