"Israel must be wiped off the map"! But did Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actually say this?

by RobbieS Fri Oct 28, 2005 06:42

Mahmoud Ahmedinejad was addressing thousands of students at (of all things) a World Without Zionism Conference.

Aljazeera aren't too clear on the translation to begin with, but then give more detail on the speech (initial story being carried by Associated Press).

In referring to the recent suicide bomb in Hadelera, he said "there is no doubt that the new wave in Palestine will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the Islamic world...The fighting in Palestine is a war between the (whole) Islamic nation and the world of arrogance".

The US had supported the pro-WB/IMFer Ali Akhbar Hafshani Rafsanjani, and when Ahmedinejad won with a more populist message, the US magnanimously tried to link him to the hostage-taking at the US Embassy in Teheran (1979-1981).

In saying what he did, Ahmedinejad was doing something unusual for a politician - simultaneously sticking to his principles (honestly), and standing by Iranian government policy.
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=9898


Israel's initiation of the latest round of violence last Sunday is a disgrace,
http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=9898
but they have been killing Palestinians week in, week out during the 'truce'.
http://www.radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/10/7356.php

by Rob Fri Oct 28, 2005 09:59

Robbie

I'm a bit confused, are you claiming the remarks were mis-quoted? mis-translated? taken out of context?

by Noel Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:23

"Who knows maybe President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is actually a U.S./Israeli agent? He sure sounds like one!"

This Iranian nutter lets the Judenhass cat out of the Islamist bag - and suddenly he's Mossad.
Or maybe, just maybe, Islamists do want to kill all the Jews and wipe Israel off the map.
I would have thought that would be cause for celebrating around these parts.

by Mark C - Teacher Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:13

Interesting translation Robbie, which would suggest that what the Iranian is actually saying is that the mis-goings on in Palestine will one-day stop. This seems like a nice proposition to me. That said, if he is calling for a nation to be wiped off the face of the earth this would be an obvious call for genocide, which must be opposed. And then that said, has he really said anything different to what many people are actually thinking themselves?

An interesting book I got recently on (mostly) the Palestine issue was Edward W. Said's latest collection of essays "Oslo to Iraq and the Roadmap".

by hmmmm Fri Oct 28, 2005 11:51

"the late Edward Said's last collection"?

by RobbieS Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:09

Even, to wipea country off a map, could be interpreted as removing its borders (existence). Ahmedinejad was criticising Zionism after all.

On the other hand, I respect Aljazeera's second interpretation/translation, which puts everything in an even more metaphorical/symbolic light.

More power to Edward Said. Palesrael means means equal human rights for all. including the 20% of the Israeli population who are officially called 'Israeli-Arabs' [yeh, right!].

by Noel Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:22

"Even, to wipea country off a map, could be interpreted as removing its borders"

Okey dokey Robbie - but it's a bit confusing when Iran recently paraded it's Shahab missiles - daubed with the easily misinterpreted 'Israel must be wiped off the map' slogans.

by hmmmmmm Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:22

yes more power to Edward Said, he went to meet his maker in a coffin without a flag.

by Rob Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:25

Yes robbie, I'm sure your interpretation is correct, which is why the world must be vigilant to stop Iran developing its Tippex programme

by rob Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:27

Noel, they wernt missiles, they were giant pencils, did you not see the rubbers at the back?

by hmmmmmm (i'm in a humour today) Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:37

a souped up version of Scud B. (maximum range 300 km.) The Shahab has been improved though over time, The latest version "Shahab-3" is a medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM) developed indigenously by Iran. With a range of 1300km, it can reach Israel, which has prompted concern in that nation. Who have accordingly ordered more missile development of their own. currently only having 33 different types already varying from anti-runway, to anti-aircraft, to sea-launched, to balistic, to surface to surface.
The Shahab3, was based on the Nodong-1, [The Rodong-1 (spelled Nodong-1 in south Korea), is a single stage, mobile liquid propellant medium range ballistic missile developed by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea). Developed in the mid-1980s, it is an adaptation of the Soviet SS-1, more commonly known by its NATO reporting name "Scud."
It is believed North Korea obtained Scud-B designs from Egypt and possibly Scud-C designs from the People's Republic of China, and reverse-engineered them into a larger, longer-distance weapon dubbed the Rodong. U.S. reconnaissance satellites first detected this type in May 1990. North Korea alarmed Japan in 1993 by launching a test missile towards Honshu, although the missile fell harmlessly into the Sea of Japan.]

anyway shahab 3 was tested from 1998-2003. It was added to the military arsenal on July 7, 2003, with an official unveiling by Ayatollah Khamenei on July 20.

Iranian Defense Minister Admiral Shamkhani has denied allegations that Iran plans to develop a Shahab-4 and there are rumours that a Shahab-3D have been made.
The Shahab-3 was first seen in public on September 25, 1998 in Azadi Square, Tehran in a parade held to commemorate the Iranian Sacred Defence Week, anniversary of the beginning of the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.
On November 9, 2004, Shamkhani claimed that Iran had the capability of mass-producing the missile.

How you can help :-

1) Keep your eyes peeled for Iranian MRBM missiles with Shahab "3d", "4", "5", or "6" written on them. If you see one, tell your local garda. You may get a reward, pipes, flag draped coffin stuff like that, "standard honours" in the "name of the nation".

2) Write to your local TD demanding that ireland play its part in the balistic defence shield of Israel.

3) write anti-ballistic missile graffiti in farsi.

4) do a vigil with candles.

by Seamus Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:41

The zionist land called "israel" was put on the map by ethnic cleansing and murder and continues to exist by these means. Is calling for a world without Zionism so bad? I would be happy to live in a world without Zionism, be a hell of a lot more peaceful and a happier place then it is now. Now when I say Zionism I mean the so called state of israel, not referring to jews in general, before the usual crap of equating anti zionism with antisemitism is thrown at me.

Justice for Palestine

by Noel Fri Oct 28, 2005 12:45

Seamus,
Dr. King had the measure of your sort.

by Ali H. Fri Oct 28, 2005 13:20

Would must be spinning in his grave when he has non-existent quotes attributed to him yet again.

As somebody who opposed discrimination and racial segregation all his life he would without doubt be a vocal critic of Israel and would probably be labled an anti-semite or equivalent slur for his trouble.

The real tragedy here is that Israel has now been given carte blanche to continue with its policy of murder of its opponents under a smokescreen of ritual denunciations and debates.

Israel has obviously taken this route to cement its hold over the territory it illegally occupies and doesn't give a toss about civilian casualties on either side.

A great day for democracy.

by Barry Fri Oct 28, 2005 13:29

Would Britain and the US really be that dumb to try and invade Iran now too ? Is this guy trying to suck them in and bleed them even drier ?

I dont believe hes a dumbass , a definite badass though for sure . This guy seems to take his revolution seriously . He knows that if they succeed in putting the lid even halfways on Iraq , most likely by initiating internal civil war , then the imperialists will be coming after his country next . Thats a cert and was always the plan .

Maybe hes trying to pick the time and place and seize the initiative , not just wait for an invasion when Bush and Blair feel the times right . Maybe he wants them to go in now half assed , because its a cert theyre going to eventually .

by righteous pragmatist Fri Oct 28, 2005 14:01

This guy is not stupid.
He knows that in the West black is white and white is black.
He knows when he says "wipe Israel off the map" that liberals will not react reasonably.

A reasonable person who reads or hears of what he said would keep in mind that Iran is an Islamic state bent on acquiring nuclear technology - shrill alarm bells would go off.

A liberal who has been fed on a diet of
"Israel and Sharon BAD / Arafat and Palestinians GOOD" will have already ignored the Israelis justifications for its hardline actions against terrorists such Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad.
If they are told that these terrorist groups will not be satisfied with the occupied territories but the destruction of Israel itself they discount such "nonsense."

So when the Iranian leader calls for Israel to be wiped off the map he knows liberals would say: "That can't be true can it? I mean the Persian must have been mistranslated into English. He must have merely said "Israel is a very naughty nation."

When Israel eventually (there is no doubt it will happen unless Iran backs down) launches an air raid and destroys Iranian nuclear facilities to prevent them from producing and using a weapon to "wipe Israel off the map" the Anti-War movement will scream that the attack was "unprovoked."

What the Iranian leader did whether intentional or not was to declare open war against Israel. I don't think he's stupid so I think he means what he said.
He should also remember what happened to Sheik Yassin.

by avi H. Fri Oct 28, 2005 14:20

The only decent response is that of Noel.

The rest of you are a bunch of anti-semites. We Jews know from long and very bitter experience that when people threaten to kill us, they mean it. You should try having to live with a lot of the human race baying for your blood and see how you like it.

Just to remind you that people kill Jews just because they're Jews but then give bogus excuses for it. Remember the six million of us..? Or is that some made up mossad disinformation, too?

The Iranian president is a Nazi. If it quacks like a duck...YOU KNOW THE REST.

by Barry Fri Oct 28, 2005 14:25

"He should also remember what happened to Sheik Yassin"

yeah , well, he probably hasnt forgot that old mans cowardly murder , which probably just makes him want the robber state that carried it out rubbed out even more .

And as hes a genuine hardman as opposed to a cissy internet warrior with a dumbass name he gave himself which he thinks sounds hard , Im sure hes not particularly afraid either .

by Barry Fri Oct 28, 2005 14:35

http://www.32csm.org/palestine.html

by Noel Fri Oct 28, 2005 14:44

"What they did to Sheik Yassein should never be forgotten"
For once, and once only - I fully agree with Chuckie.
Never forget what happened to Yassin.
For directing terrorism he was rewarded with a feast of 72 raisins at the Allah Snackbar.

by widget Fri Oct 28, 2005 14:51

Iranians take to the streets to say "destroy israel" today, and IRNA (iranian news) tells how he wants to "support palestinians" :-
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-24/0510280247134435.htm

The reaction of world islamic regimes is crucial.
Iran is playing a card, the "we all hate zionism" card. This is to garner support for their regime in the face of "imminent" war with the west. Think back to Saddam, did he ever play this card properly? no he didn't. And watch how Israel wants to discuss it at the UN now. So rather than looking at the annual Qods day rallies in Iran
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-24/0510288716104043.htm
we ought be looking at how Qods is being marked further afield in the muslim world. Interestingly the Pakistani's aren't interested :-
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-16/0510282766152944.htm
The iranians also carry Clare Short blaming the US support of Israel for the world's problems
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-20/0510281213151559.htm

ahmedinajad at the conference for "rabidly anti Israeli people"

by avi H. Fri Oct 28, 2005 15:17

Just because someone is old and in a wheelchair doesn't mean he can't direct others to murder our children. In that situation, he is as guilty as the people that built the bombs and the bomber and everyone else. To kill him is protecting the innocent, which is what we did and will do to anyone anywhere in the world, and that includes Ireland, who threaten us.

by rob Fri Oct 28, 2005 15:37

I notice that the poster in front to the podium is in english. it reminds me of the time leading up to the first gulf war when a weapons facility was bombed and saddam then claimed it was in fact a factory for producing baby milk formula, as proof the regime released footage of the factory including supposed workers going about their business with "baby food factory" written on the back of their overalls - all of course in english. It was then that I realised that he took us all for fools (luckily he was only half right)

by Barry Fri Oct 28, 2005 19:14

avi H. Friday, Oct 28 2005, 2:17pm


""Just because someone is old and in a wheelchair doesn't mean he can't direct others to murder our children. In that situation, he is as guilty as the people that built the bombs and the bomber and everyone else. To kill him is protecting the innocent, which is what we did and will do to anyone anywhere in the world, and that includes Ireland, who threaten us.""

Wed better warn all the geriatric facilities to go on full alert by the sounds of things . Everything from wheelchair bound paraplegics to schoolkids and peace observers are termed dangerous by youse murdering feckers .

by bobcat Sat Oct 29, 2005 03:44

I think avi and Shirin are right. The best thing for us to do is to be scared and shoot first then ask questions later!
Does it not make more sense to marginalise extremists instead of becoming one yourself. It doesn't matter if they're Islamo-facists, Zionist extremist or Christian crusaders they all deserve to be condemned equally. Choosing sides only feeds racism and hatred, the world would be a safer place if we could learn to be a bit more reasonable.
Israel, Iran, the U.S. the E.U., every country spends too much on arms to 'defend' themselves form the barbarians who are sure to attack any day now. Instead this money should be spent on things that actually help people instead of making them more afraid of each other. The arms trade increases inequality by diverting funds form areas which would promote peace. The only purpose a weapon has is to kill, that to me is not productive.
Justice and (real) Democracy for the whole world so that we can finally get down to respecting each other and celebrating our common humanity

by Ali H. Sat Oct 29, 2005 14:08

Palestine is the only nation which has been wiped off the face of the earth by the Israelis.

The words of the Iranian president are just that .... words, rhetoric etc.!

Against the words of the Iranians we have the Israeli facts on the ground, the obliterated Palestinian nation, ethnic cleansing, daily assassinations, discrimination etc.

Not to mention the several hundred nuclear weapons the Israelis have.

We have Iranians and all muslims being called rag-heads, Islamo-facists etc. by people who claim to be democrats.

More than a little ironic I think.

To my mind those using such language to describe a whole religious group, nation etc. have not got a moral leg to stand on.

Even less so states whose existance is due to ethnic cleansing and whose continued existance relies upon discrimination, assassination and a nuclear arsenal.

As for Sheik Yassin and the "terrorist godfather" theory the BBC2 Horizon program thouroughly debunked it showing that terrorist cells form spontaneously.

This makes assassinations close to useless as the Israelis must be starting to realise but seem politically unable to acknowledge.

by Barry Sat Oct 29, 2005 14:51

The zionists knew perfectly well he wasnt organising any military operations . He was a figure who articulated the moral legitimacy of resistance to their hateful regime and the right of the Palestinian nation to exist . He lent moral and spiritual weight to the Palestinian cause . Because the Palestinians respected him and listened to him they eliminated him .

They murdered him purely out of hatred for the Palestinian people . As an insult to all of them and to deprive them of the hope he articulated . They murdered a frail old holyman as a calculated insult to an entire people and their faith .

The cackling of the zionist hyenas on this site about his death illustrates that point and their own religious bigotry .

by avi H. Sat Oct 29, 2005 14:57

Terrorist cells do not form spontaneously. They have to be incited and directed one way or another. That's why we cut off the heads of the snakes whenever we can and we save innocent lives by doing so.

Of course, the evil always give a reason for their crimes, but it's just a lie. They kill us any time any place, so there is nothing left for us to do but defend ourselves from them and all those who give them moral or physical support.

Far from being the victims, it's the muyslims who are chauvinistic, tyrannical ethnic cleansers.It's us Jews who are the underdog - just look at our land area and our poplulation in comparison. If the muslims are so nice, how come they begrudge us even one small state the size of Wales, the only Jewish state in the world, when there are thirty or forty muslim states with a land area the spanning three continents?

How come - when it is common knowledge that we are the most persecuted minority in history and within living memory, over six million of us were wiped out by anti-semites? And how come the muslims killed and persecuted their own Jewish minorities, some of them truly ancient communities thousands of years old e.g. the Yemeni, Iraqi, Algerian Jews, living bare subsistence lives many of them? How those who survived fled to Israel which now many muslims want to wipe out?

How come these people are seen as the victims, when in reality it is us Jews who are the victims?

by Barry Sat Oct 29, 2005 15:38

and we can see you shooting their children blowing up their homes and stealing their farms whenever you take a fancy to them .

by Ben Sat Oct 29, 2005 17:35

Your government sent its agents to Iraq in the late forties and early fifties, where they set off bombs in Jewish neighbourhoods, so that the Iraqi Jews would flee Baghdad and go to Israel, boosting its population. Then the new immigrants were treated like dirt by the European Jews.

This is all very well documented by historians. David Hirst has a good description of it in his work "The Gun and the Olive Branch", the chapter titled "Cruel Zionism", which also deals with the experience of Jews elsewhere in the Middle East.

And please, spare us the underdog waffle. You have one of the world's most powerful armies. You have nuclear weapons. If all your neighbours attacked you at once, you could easily defeat them. It's not a clash between you and the Muslim world. Most Arab governments don't give a damn about the Palestinians, and have stabbed them in the back more than once. It's a clash between you and a people whose land you took, whose right to self-determination you are denying with tanks and rockets. This is what the world sees (including many Jews who have joined the Palestinian solidarity movement).

by Fhredumb O'Toolocracy Sat Oct 29, 2005 18:55

Why are the Iranian people living in a theocratic state as opposed to a democratic one?

Iran and the region are living in the shadow of the Islamic revolution after the US’s removal of the democratically elected Mohammad Mosaddeq in the 1953 Coup in Iran (BP or Anglo-Iranian Oil Company were not happy with Mossaddeq’s plan of Iranian oil profits going to Iranians leaving a considerable hole in their dividend drawers. Qu the British and Eisenhower buying some thugs and guns....) which resulted in the imposed dictatorship of the Shah .


http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/iran/index.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

http://www.opendemocracy.net/content/iran.jsp

See,

All the Shah's Men : An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror by Stephen Kinzer

"Most of Tehran was asleep when an odd caravan set out through the darkness shortly before midnight on August 15, 1953..."

Iranian Prime Minster Mohammad Mosaddeq being carried away by supporters outside the parliament building after an address on oil nationalization. (Copyright 2003, AP/Wide World Photos)

by Buckbowski Sun Oct 30, 2005 07:24 carthagebuckley at yahoo dot ie

Having read through all the garbage you have been putting up on the site I can see only one point of truth. Yes, terrorist cells arise out of incitement. However you fail to understand that stealing their country, and murdering their people whenever you fancy it is just the incitement that these maniacs are looking for.

I do not agree with murder on either side, however its about time that Israel behaved like the great nation it proclaims itself to be. Stop taking the easy way out and look for the peaceful solution. If you used your brains as readily as you use your military then you would easily find a workable solution.

On another note stop playing the victim card. The whole world is fed up with it. Move on!

by eastern eye Sun Oct 30, 2005 14:27

Unfortunately, its not as easy and as fast as it seems.

by Buckbowski Mon Oct 31, 2005 00:33

Eastern Eye I agree that it is not as easy as it seems, but this does not give us the excuse to take the easy way out i.e. kill and maim.

Why not take the North as an example. For too long both sides tried to get their way by slaughtering the other side. All we ever had was one continuous cycle of violence.

However over the last 15 years the majority of people have focused on finding a peaceful solution. Grant it the north is by no means perfect but the situation has progressed a great deal in those 15 years (which in terms of history is a very short time).

Its time people in the middle east tried to take responsibility for what is happening and put their focus on finding a peaceful solution. Otherwise we will all be here in 50 years talking the same talk about the same situation.

I agree that it may not be that easy but if they put their minds to it it is not that difficult either.

by ellen Mon Oct 31, 2005 01:08

What must be wiped off the map is the worlds war machine and its manufactury. The whole point of the industrial revolution must be to produce in solidarity with the worlds livability. Thus re-tool the entire industrial revolution to wind, tidal, and solar power which transforms to electricity and is more power than can be used by society. This non-pollution solution ends the industrial war of global pollution going on, on the planet, since its inception in the 19th century. Wiping states off the map is Hitlerian, and unjust because the working class lives and works in countries and is progressive and the core of the livability in each and every country. In fact, the method of 1) Pre-emptive strikes, 2) Might makes right, 3) Unilateralism was core to the military strategy of the Nazis-Fascist Axis powers in the second world war. The anti-fascist covenants of Nuremburg Trials , United Nations Charter, the World Court of the Hague, The Geneva Conventions and recently the International War Crimes Tribunal (Bertrand Russell) style set up to judge American Imperialist War Crimes against Indo-China and again recently to judge the American War Crimes going on against the sovereign country of Iraq, using the above mentioned guides of the anti-fascist united front from the second world war. We must remember that the Nuremburg Trials and the United Nations Charter was brought into being to end Aggressive War as a nations foreign policy, as both these documents point out that aggressive war is the worst crime possible, as it sets in motion all lthat is worst in world events, and that negotiation and democracy as collective aggreement must be arrived at for dealing with nations around the globe. Canadas first division did its hardest fighting to scrap the war machine and begin freeing the peoples with working aggreements. WMD , of which the U.S.A has the most, are illegal and the source of the worst war crimes as terror, the world has yet witnessed. End the war machine by dismantling it. Peace equals disarmament. Viva socialism. Viva liberation.

by rob Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:46

"The whole point of the industrial revolution must be to produce in solidarity with the worlds livability."

Really? according to whom?

by Ali H. Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:57

"They have to be incited and directed one way or another. "

Indeed the Israelis do a great job in encouraging tit-for-tat attacks by butchering old men in wheelchairs, riddling schoolgirls and little boys with machineguns and blowing up peaceful protesters with helicopter gunships.

Not to mention taking peoples land, communities and livelyhoods away, walling them into ghettos, depriving them of equal rights etc.

The best incitement is to kill somebodys child, relative or friend. You dont need a terrorist godfather when your oppressor behaves in this barbaric manner and more often than not slurs the memory of its victims by claiming posthumously that they were terrorists without a shred of evidence.

"That's why we cut off the heads of the snakes whenever we can and we save innocent lives by doing so."

If this were true Israels policy of extra-judicial murder would be seen to work.

Only a complete zealot would fail to realise that Israeli tactics do not work and the only hope for Israel is to make a just peace with those whom it has dispossed, killed, maimed and discriminated against.

by flamini Mon Oct 31, 2005 15:44

What is it going to take for the Left to realise that the Arab dictatorships surrounding Israel really do want to destroy it? They could be no more explicit. Israel is the only civilised nation in the Middle East, a place where people of all faiths, including more than a million Muslims, freely choose to live in peace and security. In Israel you are free to be atheist, homosexual, socialist, Muslim, Jewish, whatever you want. You are free to vote, free to speak your mind, free to live your life as you choose. The Left doesn't care about this, and sides with theocracies like Iran instead, the worst regimes in the world. Ever wondered why young people in nightclubs have so often been the target of suicide bombers? Because Islamic fundamentalists hate liberalism, hate sexual freedom, hate individual rights. They want to wipe it all out, and replace it with tyranny as in Iran, for example. This is the mindset you defend when you make excuses for Ahmadinejad, and for all those in the Middle East who are trying to destroy Israel.

"Israel is the only free country in a region dominated by Arab monarchies, theocracies and dictatorships. It is only the citizens of Israel - Arabs and Jews alike - who enjoy the right to express their views, to criticize their government, to form political parties, to publish private newspapers, to hold free elections. When Arab authorities deny the most basic freedoms to their own people, it is obscene for them to start claiming that Israel is violating the Palestinians' rights. All Arab citizens who are genuinely concerned with human rights should, as their very first action, seek to oust their own despotic rulers and adopt the type of free society that characterizes Israel. "

http://www.israelismoral.com/

by Ali H. Mon Oct 31, 2005 16:54

"In Israel you are free to be atheist, homosexual, socialist, Muslim, Jewish, whatever you want. You are free to vote, free to speak your mind, free to live your life as you choose. "

As long as you're not Muslim/Gay/Secular etc.

Far from being the paradise you describe Israel actively discriminates against it's own Muslim citizens.

It also allows Israeli extremists to organise gay-bashing protests.

And is held hostage to extremist Zionist and religious groups allowing religious extremists to evade military service while sending secular Jews to do their fighting for them.

by flamini Mon Oct 31, 2005 17:13

In Israel, homosexual couples have common-law marriage rights recognised by the government. There was a gay pride parade in Jerusalem in June:
http://www.jerusalemshots.com/cat_en91.html

Palestinian gays and lesbians hide out in Israel to avoid the retribution of their families and Palestinian society:
http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=13623

In Iran, sodomy is punished by death or by 74 lashes if the offender is not an adult. Lesbians receive 100 lashes, or death. According to Wikipedia,

"no public discussion of homosexuality is permitted, no gay rights organizations are allowed to exist and no political party that supports gay rights will have their candidates on the election ballot."

If you were a homosexual, would you choose to live in Israel or in Iran?

by R. Isible Mon Oct 31, 2005 18:49

Living beneath the sewerage outflows of the Israeli settlements or living in comfort in Haifa? Also, is my home subject to demolition by Israeli bulldozers and will my refugee camp be at risk from massacre by Falangist militias supervised by Israelis.

by flamini Mon Oct 31, 2005 19:18

More than a million Arab Muslims choose to live in Israel, and don't want to be ruled by the Palestinian Authority, e.g.:

"The director of the Bayt Hanina community council in northern Jerusalem, Husam Watad, found that the prospect of finding themselves living under Arafat's control had people "in a panic. More than 50 percent of east Jerusalem residents live below the poverty line, and you can imagine how the situation would look if residents did not receive [Israeli] National Insurance Institute payments." In the view of Fadal Tahabub, a member of the Palestinian National Council, an estimated 70 percent of the 200,000 Arab residents of Jerusalem preferred to remain under Israeli sovereignty."
The Washington Post, July 25, 2000.
http://www.meforum.org/article/702#_ftnref8

by Noel Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:32

"Also, is my home subject to demolition by Israeli bulldozers"
If you or your partner commits an atrocity against Israelis the answer is yes.

"Will my refugee camp be at risk from massacre by Falangist militias supervised by Israelis."
No. Israelis do not and never have supervised Phalangist militias.

Any more pertinent questions need answering?

by kintama Wed Nov 02, 2005 00:38

Noel has finally lapsed into total insanity with his definitive statement that Israelis never supervised Phalangist militias. I am not sure which part of Sabra and Shatila massacre he does not understand but his ongoing and offensive holocaust denial type statements really should be removed to allow for rational discussion on the site.

by rob Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:58

Whilst there were mistakes made, there was no 'supervision' of the massacres by the Israeli forces

I would however like to draw your attention to the massacre by the syrian regime of its own people (also in 1982) , the town was hama and the death toll was 30,000. Of course there were no protests in the dublin streets about this.....funny that

http://www.2la.org/lebanon/ee/terrorsy.htm

by Ali H. Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:10

Just like the Israelis didn't help help the phalangists (not):

Refugees and UN officers had all talked of hearing the Israeli artillery "spotter" aircraft before and during the Israeli attack on the UN base.

But here at last, in living colour, was the proof: distinct pictures of the small Israeli aircraft over Qana, the plane that the Israelis -- for two weeks -- claimed was never there.

The Israelis (and their facist Lebanese militia front) by the way Noel account for the majority of the 48 Irish soldiers who died in Lebanon while on peace-keeping duty!

http://www.norplatoon.net/content/view/87/53/

by Noel Wed Nov 02, 2005 17:08

Had the Phalangists been supervised by the IDF no massacre would have taken place.

As for your claim that the majority of the 47 Irish UN peacekeepers killed in Lebanon was due to Israel or even the Lebanese militias - that is a lie.

The majority of Irish UNIFIL casualties were motor accidents or illness. Which leaves small number killed by hostilities.
Of these Hizbollah and Palestinian kidnappers make up the lions share.

So, yet another lie Ali - to go along with your Jenin, Muhammed Al-Dura and Dr. King lies.
Why you'll be claiming not to hate Jews next.

by No Hell Wed Nov 02, 2005 17:22

What did Kahan find Sharon, Saguy and Yaron responsible for?

by Noel Wed Nov 02, 2005 17:35

"What did Kahan find Sharon, Saguy and Yaron responsible for?"

Kahan did not find the above mentioned heroes responsible. They were found to be indirectly responsible.

by Soldier Wed Nov 02, 2005 17:56

As a soldier who has served in lebanon Noel your comments are disgusting, many soldiers were killed wither directly by israeli fire or by the Israeli backed SLA.

It is a fact that two soldiers Ptes. Barrett and Smallhorne were kidnapped by israeli backed militia and murdered, the killer was helped relocate to the US by Israel, he is currently living in detroit and openly admits to being helped and supported by israel, this is a fact .

Fact Pte. Billy Kedian was killed in a mortar attack on a UNIFL compound in 1999, a mortatr attack carried out by the SLA with Israeli weapons. Another soldier was seriously wonded.

Fact: any Irish soldier will tell you of the hours of bombardment endured by peacekeepers shelled by the Israeli forces.

Fact, one peacekeeper killed by Israel or their puppet forces is a crime

Deny that if you can

Dont slur their memory by your propaganda claim

And as regards semantics

what is the difference between responsible and indirectly responsible

surely the key word is responsible?

In the cases above maybe Israel was only indirectly responsible. whatever that means

by Ali H. Wed Nov 02, 2005 18:28

The Israeli army murdered 100 unarmed civilians through shell fire in while they were inside a UN base in Qana which was directed by Israeli aircraft.

The Israeli army denied that any aircraft were present making up lies thoroughly debunked in the UN report on the incident. Film evidence was produced to prove that the Israelis had lied.

The Israeli army is composed of arrogant habitual liars without a shred of honour who murder innocents and then try to cover their tracks by besmirching the names of the dead.

With this track record and only the Israelis word for it, and plenty of evidence to the contrary, that they were not directing the campaigns of the Facist Lebanese militia, I and many others refuse to believe your lies.

This refusal to accept Israeli lies as fact goes for Jenin, Mohammed al-Dura (and the legions of other innocents butchered by the so-called "soldiers" of the IDF) and MLK to whom quotes have falsely been attributed and have not been endosed by his family who knew him best.

by Jarhead Wed Nov 02, 2005 18:34

Of the Irish UNIFIL dead were killed by the IDF and SLA.

by No Hell Wed Nov 02, 2005 18:38

"Kahan did not find the above mentioned heroes responsible. They were found to be indirectly responsible."

This is how they viewed their indirect responsibility:
"Israeli military personnel were aware that a massacre was in progress without taking serious steps to stop it, and that reports of a massacre in progress were made to senior Israeli officers and even to an Israeli cabinet minister; it therefore regarded Israel as bearing part of the "indirect responsibility"."

Indirectly responsible, now that sounds like telling mistruths to me.

by Ali H. Wed Nov 02, 2005 18:52

Israeli reports at the time quote spokesmen who said that after the massacre the IDF had ordered the Phalangists out and needless to say they complied with their master and paymasters order.

Of the truth about Ariel Sharon and the massacres will never be known because Elie Hobeika, a key witness in the Sabra-Chatila war crimes case being pursued in a Belgian court against Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, was blown up outside his house in Beirut on Jan. 24, 2002, together with three bodyguards and a civilian bystander.

The car-bomb was the work of professional assassins in the employ of Mossad, the Israeli secret service. The explosion occured two days after Hobeika agreed to give evidence against Sharon in Belgium. Hobeika had met Belgian Senators Josy Dubie and Vincent van Quickenborne in east Beirut, agreeing to be a witness at any trial of Sharon for the Sabra and Chatila massacre.

Of course the Israelis had nothing to do with it and it was a pure coincidence.

by kintama Wed Nov 02, 2005 19:54

I assume that if I made reference to Hitler as a hero in relation to his treatment of the Jews the post would be rightly removed. Noel consistently posts deliberately provocative and offensive references to the death of Palestinians and lauds those who direct mass murder such as Sharon. While I am opposed to censorship mocking the deaths of Palestinians for the sole purpose of being offensive should not be tolerated.

by Interesting Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:20

Its interesting that Noel remains quiet when actual facts of Israel's murderous policies are laid before him.

The embassy is being provocative but will stay quiet while the evidence is laid before them.

Noel I hope you get some satisfaction from slurring the memory of people, including those who dies as a result of violence against Jewish people

by rob Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:51

What facts?? All i can see is innuendo, conjecture and the usual jew baiting. This thread was supposed to be about Iran threatening to nuke Israel, and per usual ends up with the anti israeli/jew mob out in ugly force.

by Interesting Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:08

fact: Qana in lebanon over 100 people killed

fact: 40% of Irish peacekeepers killed in Lebanon killed by Israel and thier puppet army

fact: Israel continues to ignore international law, the UN, Geneva Conventions, International Court of Justice

fact: Israel has secretly developed Nuclear weapons outside of international control something that Iran is now trying to do

fact: amnesty international and human rights watch annually report on Israel's human rights abuses in palestine.

fact: Israel continues to buiold settlements on land in the West bank, this is illegal under international law

fact: Israel is building an apartheid wall on palestinian lands, declared illegal by the International court of justice

fact: the israeli military killed two peace activists in Gaza - Rachel Corrie and Tim Hurndall

come on rob what other facts do you need to see, the reason the thred turned this way is because the likes of noel turned it so, the iranian comment is disgusting and Israel has a right to exist. Israel has no right to commit crimes and ignore international law

by Ali H. Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:11

In order to be able to nuke Israel the Iranians would actually have to have multiple atomic bombs and a weapons delivery system capable of getting past Israels defences.

They have neither!

Claiming that Israel is in imminent danger of attack is pure tripe and in fact is aimed at making a case for invasion.

Israel despite protestations to the contrary has always had the upper hand militarily in the region and now even more so with the demise of Saddams regieme.

The estimate 200-400 nuclear weapons Israel has goes well beyond what could legitimately be claimed to be required for defense.

Let's also not forget that Israel has the will and means in terms of submarine launched nukes and missiles capable of reaching New York of delivery, therefore this is no idle threat.

It is the offensive threat posed by these Israeli weapons that causes the other governments in the region to want to acquire their own nukes to counterbalance the Israeli threat, just as the Pakistanis acquired such weapons to counterbalance the Indian threat.

Let's also not forget that Israel has a track record of aggression in the region since its inception, invading and occupying the terroritory of its neighbours on at least one occaision completely without provocation of any kind (Suez).

Why should Israel not be subjected to the same threat it poses to its neighbours?

Surely it is time for Israel to join the rest of us in the 21st century from the pre-biblical times where its collective head is and start to reduce its offensive arsenal, while continuing to hold onto what it requires for purely defensive purposes?

by rob Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:28

Couple of brief points

1. yes israel has nukes which they have had for years (never showing any intention of using them)

2. they were not ilegal as Israel has not signed up to any treaties on this matter.

3. iran has signed such treaties.

4. Israel has never threatned its neighbours with destruction (never mind nuclear or not)

5. Israel has been invaded by its neisghbours several times, they conqured the the sinai in a defensive war aand then later gave it up in return for a peace treaty with egypt.

6. The international community also has been very critical of the Palestinians (in fact as a palestinan you are more likely to be killed by your own. (such killings are simply listed as deaths in the isreali/palestinan conflict with no mention of who actually did the killings)

7. since the erection of the security barrier the sucicide murder of its citizens including isreali arabs has fallen.

8. the so called west bank was not seized from the palestinians but from Jordan which had earlier annexed it.

Finally you said the following

"Let's also not forget that Israel has the will and means in terms of submarine launched nukes and missiles capable of reaching New York of delivery, therefore this is no idle threat."

A truely bizzare and ilogical statement what idle threat? when did israel ever threaten the US or any other country with nuclear weapons?

I could go on but I realise, you dont really care about any opinion but the one you have been spoon fed or that sprang from your hatred of jews

by Interesting Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:42

rob please reply to these

1. Israel developed the nuclear weapons in secret and does not admit to their existence, why?

2. Israel jailed Vanunu in 1986 after kidnapping him for revealing their secrets. Why?

3. The West Bank was taken from Jordanian control, the population was palestinian. The fact that Palestinians were residing in therarea was acknowledged as far back as the founding of the Zionist project. Do you not agree that there was a native population of Palestine before the founding of Israel.

4. The Apartheid Wall is illegal according to the ICJ -please comment

5.Please comment on Israel ignoring over 200 Un resolutions

6. Ronnie Kasrils South African Minister has called Israel a settler state far worse that South Africa was under Apartheid, he is white and jewish please comment

7. Please comment on Israel's activities in lebanon including the murdering of UN peacekeepers

by rob Thu Nov 03, 2005 13:05

1. Israel developed the nuclear weapons in secret and does not admit to their existence, why?

every country develops its nucleaur weapons in secret - why should Israel tell anyone? what do you want a formal declaration?

2. Israel jailed Vanunu in 1986 after kidnapping him for revealing their secrets. Why?

simple - for revealing its secrets (they since released him

3. Do you not agree that there was a native population of Palestine before the founding of Israel.

Yes there was a native popultaion (jews included) but there was no palestine

4. The Apartheid Wall is illegal according to the ICJ -please comment

There is no legal requirement for israel to accept any rulings from the ICJ

5.Please comment on Israel ignoring over 200 Un resolutions

The UN is blatently anti Israel and the sooner this talking shop is disbanded the better. Every country ignores UN resolutions.

6. Ronnie Kasrils South African Minister has called Israel a settler state far worse that South Africa was under Apartheid, he is white and jewish please comment

One cranks opinion does not make a fact

7. Please comment on Israel's activities in lebanon including the murdering of UN peacekeepers

Provide proof before i comment - and I mean actual proof

by Noel Thu Nov 03, 2005 13:48

The Israel's secret nukes chestnut and the clown Vanunu.

Israel probably knew he would try to sell his story. He duly does, no actual secrets were lost, no details, no specifics.
However, the Arab League piss their pants and have a serious rethink about the ol' War of Annihiliation gig. Very worthwhile.

by interesting Thu Nov 03, 2005 14:17

guys


1. israel maintains nuclear ambuguity because of a law in the US which forbids US aid being given to states which develop nuclear capabilities outside of international inspection.

2. Vanunu was illegally kidnapped and is currently under restictions which include not talking to foreigners

3. The UN is not anti-Israel. Over 200 resolution passed against Israel including resolution passed with US support. Currently 220 resolution lie ignored, one cannot simply state that you ignore resolutions because they are anti israel.

4. If Israel coes not have any obligation to obey international law and rulings then how can people justify a war on Iraq based on non compliance with UN resolutions

5. The rpoof regarding Israeli comlplicity in the killing of Irish peacekeepers is given in earlied threads.

Pts. Smallhorne and Barrett directly killed by israeli supported militia, there was one survivor of this incident and he has officillay stated that a Shin Beit officer was present at the murders.

Pts. Kedian killed in 1999 was killed during an artillery attack using heavy artillery the only force using the artillery was Israel, the shots were seen coming from Israeli positions

Also Qana where 100 people were massacred is prooof of israeli murder in lebanon

6. Israel has 1.2 million non jewish "citizens" who are constantly calling for better rights, while there is currently an organisation of african jewish immigrants seeking to be treaed with equal right inside israel.

7. Ronnie Kasrils has lived through apartheid and cant be dismissed as a crank just as Desmond Tutu has described Israel in the same terms, as have John Gormley, Tony Gregory, Eamon Gilmore, John Paul Phelan, Terry Leyeden all politicans from ireland.

8. There are many jewish organisation inside Israel and outside which work to end the occupation and the militaristic nature of the Israeli state. ICAD, B'tselem, not in my Name, jewish Vocies for Peace, Jews against the Occupation etc etc etc,

being against oppression and occupation is not anti-jewish.

by Ali H. Thu Nov 03, 2005 14:22

"A truely bizzare and ilogical statement what idle threat? when did israel ever threaten the US or any other country with nuclear weapons?"

Given that by your own admission Israel has never acknowledged that it has nuclear weapons despite photographic and other evidence that it has, the threat of nuclear attack by Israel on its neighbours is implicit.

Israel has already shown numerous times in the past that it will attack its neighbours and enemies without warning or provovation so it would be entirely consistent that they would also consider and employ pre-emptive nuclear attack.

A leopard never changes its spots.

If Israel only needed these weapons for defense and the only enemies that Israel has are local why does it need an ICBM system capable of delivering a 1000kg payload over a 10,000km range?

For the crack?

To waste money because they have it to burn?

Because it seemed like a good idea at the time?

Why?

How about an answer this time instead of another hysterical facist rant?

by rob Thu Nov 03, 2005 15:10

First of all bandying terms like 'facist' just becauee someone is pointng out your mistakes or has a different opinion then you does not help your cause. Grow up for gods sake.

ok you said

"Given that by your own admission Israel has never acknowledged that it has nuclear weapons despite photographic and other evidence that it has, the threat of nuclear attack by Israel on its neighbours is implicit."

Does it? by what standards?

Isreal neither acknowledges or denies that it has nuclear weapons.

you then went on

"Israel has already shown numerous times in the past that it will attack its neighbours and enemies without warning or provovation"

When??? what history books are you reading?? Ahh perhaps you mean the attack on the Iraqi nuclear faciity or the short term invasion of lebanon to wipe out bases from which the PLO where attacking it from as you certainly could not be refferring to the six day or yom kippur war when ALL its neighbours tried to destroy it

and finally

"If Israel only needed these weapons for defense and the only enemies that Israel has are local why does it need an ICBM system capable of delivering a 1000kg payload over a 10,000km range?"

Not sure what your point is here, who do you think its targets are?

would love to know.

also would love to know your definition of the word facist oh and rant while you are at it

by rob Thu Nov 03, 2005 15:15

Interesting... there are two types of UN resolution called "chapter six" and "chapter seven" respectivly. If you have time to look it up I am sure it will explain things to you

by interesting Thu Nov 03, 2005 17:40

rob

you for some reason continue to ignore the questions posed about Israels complicity in the murder of Irish peacekeeeprs and civilians in Qana in lebanon-why

Israel's entry into the UN was made dependent on abiding by UN resolutions that they have since ignored

It is generally accepted by international lawyers that Israel disregards international law- what is your opinion should international law be diregarded?

What about the use of torture by Israel and the use of human shields something only made illegal by thier courts this year? Are these practices ok

Rob you can argue your points but ignoring certain questions is ignoring reality

by Noel Thu Nov 03, 2005 19:03

Q. Name all the countries of the UN which are ineligible for a seat on the security council.

Iran obviously.
No?
Surely North Korea.
No?
Cuba? Syria? Burma?
No?

Just one country is ineligible.
I'll give you a big clue - A lot of people around these parts advocate it's being wiped off the map.

by Peace Lovin' Cynic Thu Nov 03, 2005 19:25

"A lot of people around these parts advocate it's being wiped off the map".

How many people, exactly? I haven't seen any contributors advocate this. How about some links to newswire posts to back this claim up.

by Noel Thu Nov 03, 2005 20:15

"I haven't seen any contributors advocate this. How about some links to newswire posts to back this claim up..........."

why not wipe "israel" off the map
by Seamus Friday, Oct 28 2005, 11:41am

You missed that contributor - and that's on this thread!

by Peace Lovin' Cynic Thu Nov 03, 2005 20:37

So, there's one. There's always one :-)

I'd imagine that the vast majority of people who post on this site (only a few comment on these highly polarised Israel / Palestine articles) would rather see a just and peaceful accomodation (however implausible such a scenario might seem in the near future) over either side being wiped off the map.

by Interesting Thu Nov 03, 2005 21:13

The interesting point is that Noel/Rob and other apologists for Israel never answer the questions posed regarding Israel and denial of human rights etc etc

Rob questions the proof and evidence of certain claims yet ignores the proof and dosent respond

Noel claims that one contributor indicates a groundswell of opinion for Israel being wiped off the map

Only the insane and racist would claim Israel should be wiped off the map but please come on a claim by a mad Iranian politican cannot be used as an excuse to justify what Israel has and continues to do to the Palestinian people

by oded Thu Nov 10, 2005 23:30

was a murderer who send so many people with explosive belts to die and take with them plenty of families who take buses, eat in restaurants atc
he deserved to die

by kintama Fri Nov 11, 2005 00:33

You will of course accept that using your own logic Sharon is therefore a murderer who deserves to die.

by Ali H. Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:54

The reason for this is that Israel is not part of a regional group because of its ongoing poor relations with its neighbours who have blocked its membership.

Moral of the story : get on with your neighbours and they won't block your membership!

by dR rjp - The Human Race Mon Feb 27, 2006 00:37

President Ahmadinejad has stated previously that he wants a Middle East free of Jews. He is talking about PEOPLE and not lines on a map. He has also said that "Jews deserve death."

When he said "Israel should be wiped off the map," he meant ethnic cleansing in the strctest sense of the phrase!!!

by Para Dice - none Sun Jun 11, 2006 21:30

Sheik Yassin: can't be considered a murderer lets portray the Israeli/Pal conflict for what it is: a war. This may seem a difficult distinction to make given the inequality of the combatants, but that is effectually what it is. As noted by Barry: "He was a figure who articulated the moral legitimacy of resistance to their hateful regime and the right of the Palestinian nation to exist . He lent moral and spiritual weight to the Palestinian cause." The counselling of resistance in the pursuit of indegeneous rights cannot be seen as a terrorist act, nay it supports human rights.

Yassin's assassination by an IDF Apache air strike came at a time when peace overtures were starting: the assassination effectively ended that peace initiative then, just as the beach bombing end the Abbas initiatives now. There seems to be a long pattern of IDf provocation, antagonistic actions and actions designed to derail any peace process.

Why would the Israeli's do this? Well a peace process would define Israeli borders. So why have a peace when Israel is still benefitting and grabbing more WB land - ESPECAILLY THE WATER ACQUIFIERS.

The vast majority of suicide bombings occur against settler's in the OT. This "settler" operation is in fact an aggressive land grab inspired by Zionist teachings. How then can any attacks on settlers be seen as "terrorist" actions - given that the settlers are indeed a passive aggressive military force?

The Israeli child welfare authorities would do well to take children away from the parents who place their children in a war zone.

"President Ahmadinejad has stated previously that he wants a Middle East free of Jews." So what. How many Rabbi's. Israeli PM"s, Knesset members have called for the elimination of all Arabs from ISrael? Surely you are familiar with Rabi Ovedia and the Shas party?

Ofcourse the media here in America makes NO MENTION of this. Yet the Israeli threats are not only "rhetorical words" but part of the Likud's Political Platform, not to mention the on the ground reality of a "nickle and dime" approach to ethnic cleansing. IN the future please try to distinguish between cheap rhetorical words of a politician playing up to a crowd, and actual POLITICAL PLATFORMS and quasi-official State Policy - with he attendant military actions to make those policies real.

Thanks.

by get your facts straight Sun Jun 11, 2006 21:39

If the Iranians are serious about "ethnic cleansing" as a previous poster alleges, then how come there is still a Jewish community in Iran. How come they haven't all been liquidated ?
Maybe some of the Zionist propaganda currently circulating needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/iranianjews.html

''Sometimes I think they are kinder to the Jews than they are to themselves. ... If we are gathered in a house, and the family is having a ceremony with wine or the music is playing too loud, if they find out we are Jews, they don't bother us so much,'' Eliyason said. ''Everywhere in the world there are people who don't like Jews. In England, they draw swastikas on Jewish graves. I don't think that Iran is more dangerous for Jews than other places.'' Some problems exist. Testimony from Jews who have left Iran suggests more serious problems than those cited by Jews inside the country. In written testimony to a congressional subcommittee in February 1996, an Iranian Jew complained of being imprisoned for two years on trumped-up charges of spying for Israel. He also said his arrest was preceded by harassment at work and pressure to convert to Islam. Inside Iran, Jews say that they frequently receive alarmed telephone calls and letters from relatives in the United States concerned about their well-being, but that they themselves do not feel physically endangered. Their major complaint is the inability to visit family in Israel, and what they say is inadequate funding for Hebrew schools, which are administered by the Iranian Ministry of Education. Although many Jews hold jobs in government ministries or within state-owned firms, they say they are unlikely to rise to top positions. In addition, Iran's strict Islamic law, or ''sharia,'' contains many discriminatory provisions toward non-Muslims. Jews 'part of Iran' Still, Jewish leaders say their community has far stronger roots in Iran than other Middle East Jewish communities, which were virtually eradicated by massive immigration to Israel in the 1940s and 1950s.