On May 15, 4:24 pm, nada <dwalters...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 14, 3:17 pm, Vngelis <meberr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 14, 2:53 pm, dusty <trackdu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On May 14, 6:05 pm, Vngelis <meberr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > Hamas are bourgeois nationalists much in the same manner as all
others
> > > > of their ilk.
> > > > To their credit they still sup****t the right of return and they
> > > > position themselves here in what the Holocaust Conference in Iran
> > > > tried to achieve and it appears it has.
>
> > > > David is against the 'one staters' as he believes there is such a
> > > > thing as a jewish state in Palestine and not a US airbase.
> > > > David is on record as condemning the Holocaust Conference in Iran
yet
> > > > it is that which gave birth to the above statement in particular
the
> > > > point about why Palestine and Palestinian have to suffer what was
a
> > > > European issue.
>
> > > Fair dinkum? You mean he is against the originally PLO and widely
held
> > > position of sup****t for a Democratic Secular State to replace
"Israel"
> > > and incor****ating the just demands of the Palestinian people as well
> > > as welcoming those Jews who sup****t it. So his position is a bit
like
> > > that of the State Department? Just one damned road map after another
> > > till the Palestinians are (hopefully to their plans) genocided out
of
> > > existence.
>
> > > > Finklestein aside western academics are lagging behind the
situation
> > > > on the ground. The WRP for instance was so far up Arafats arse
that
> > > > they totally missed the boat on Hamas. The others are even worse
> > > > condemning them as being ...fundamentalists.
> > > > Vngelis
>
> > > Relatives of mine who read this group have acquired Finklestein's
book
> > > - David recommended it a while ago - hope to borrow it soon, though
I
> > > think I know the jist of it. They're most impressed, nay moved, by
it.
>
> > > That's a rather indelicate metaphor you use Vn, but couldn't think
of
> > > one more fitting (hope Mr Green Jeans isn't reading this).
>
> > > Speaking of State Department, did you know that the newly elected
> > > Australian government (ALP) ostensibly in return for promises to the
> > > "Jewish community" before the last election (2007) now in office
have
> > > decided to take Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the
> > > International Court of Justice for "inciting genocide" and denying
the
> > > Jewish Holocaust? Rudd said it was "strongly arguable" that Mr
> > > Ahmadinejad's conduct - statements about wiping Israel off the map,
> > > questioning whether Zionists were human beings and a conference that
> > > he convened on the veracity of the Holocaust - amounted to
incitement
> > > to genocide, which was criminalised under the 1948 genocide
> > > convention.
>
> > > My estimate is that Mr Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister (ex Foreign
> > > Affairs) is "punching well above his division" and Australia risks
> > > being held up to ridicule should this "process" procede.
>
> > For a start the Arabic translation agency and there has been an
> > article about this in the Guardian which 'translated' Amedinajads
> > statements against Israel has fabricated what he said labelling him a
> > Holocaust Denier. No where does he say he wants to wipe Israel off the
> > map.
>
> > David once more ignores the main point that Hamas statement is based
> > on what was said FIRST at the Holocaust Conference in Iran which David
> > condemned as racist and Holocaust Deniers. Its on record.
>
> > So his position on paper may be One State but in practice he spends
> > most of his time attacking the forces on the ground fighting for this
> > perspective and raises up a US academic in their place.
>
> > This touching faith in academics usually comes from people who wanted
> > to work in universities but never made it there. They actually think
> > that 'knowledge' is advanced there not degenerated.
> > vngelis
>
> The only thing 'fabricated' is his take on 'wiping Israel off the
> map'. That's pretty much been exposed on a variety of levels. That he
> "questions" the Holocaust is not. Thus his inviting David Irving and
> David Duke and other neo-Nazis (and a comrade of of Vngelis!) to
> Tehran for a "Holocaust Conference". The President of Iran (and a
> reactionary toward his own people in his own right) focuses political
> pressure on THIS subject? No translation needed...
>
> David
First you said I lied about your position that your sup****t a Jewish
state in the Middle East then you ask people to be careful about what
I say about you to others.
You continue to allege that Ahmedinajad stated that he wants Israel to
be wiped off the map...
Here is a single article of many that exist of what the Iranian
president actually stated with sources...
Hence the line of politically associating people who question 9/11 or
the zionists entities right to exist with nazism originates directly
out of the Pentagon and Walters alibi as the main front of MIA does
not cover his ACTUAL political role.
The "Wipe Israel Off The Map" Hoax
What Ahmadinejad really said and why this broken record is just
another ad slogan for war
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, January 26, 2007
Barely a day goes by that one can avoid reading or hearing yet another
Israeli, American or British warhawk regurgitate the broken record
that Iran's President Ahmadinejad threatened to "wipe Israel off the
map," framed in the ridiculous context that Israelis are being
targeted for a second holocaust. This baseless rallying call for
conflict holds about as much credibility as Dick Cheney's assertion
that Saddam Hussein was planning to light up American skies with
mushroom clouds.
Today it's the turn of would-be future British Prime Minister David
Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party, who repeated the "wipe
Israel off he map" fraud in a speech at the World Economic Forum in
Davos, using it to qualify his refusal to rule out a military strike
on Iran under a Tory government.
Did Ahmadinejad really threaten to "wipe Israel off the map" or is
this phrase just another jingoistic brand slogan for selling the next
war in the Middle East?
The devil is in the detail, wiping Israel off the map suggests a
physical genocidal assault, a literal population relocation or
elimination akin to what the Nazis did. According to numerous
different translations, Ahmadinejad never used the word "map," instead
his statement was in the context of time and applied to the Zionist
regime occupying Jerusalem. Ahmadinejad was expressing his future hope
that the Zionist regime in Israel would fall, not that Iran was going
to physically annex the country and its population.
To claim Ahmadinejad has issued a rallying cry to ethnically cleanse
Israel is akin to saying that Churchill wanted to murder all Germans
when he stated his desire to crush the Nazis. This is about the demise
of a corrupt occupying power, not the deaths of millions of innocent
people.
The Guardian's Jonathan Steele cites four different translations, from
professors to the BBC to the New York Times and even pro-Israel news
outlets, in none of those translations is the word "map" used. The
closest translation to what the Iranian President actually said is,
"The regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time," or
a narrow relative thereof. In no version is the word "map" used or a
context of mass genocide or hostile military action even hinted at.
The acceptance of the word "map" seemingly originated with the New
York Times, who later had to back away from this false translation.
The BBC also wrongly used the word and, in comments to Steele, later
accepted their mistake but refused to issue a retraction.
"The fact that he compared his desired option - the elimination of
"the regime occupying Jerusalem" - with the fall of the Shah's regime
in Iran makes it crystal clear that he is talking about regime change,
not the end of Israel. As a schoolboy opponent of the Shah in the
1970's he surely did not favor Iran's removal from the page of time.
He just wanted the Shah out," writes Steele.
"It's im****tant to note that the "quote" in question was itself a
quote, writes Arash Norouzi, "they are the words of the late Ayatollah
Khomeini, the father of the Islamic Revolution. Although he quoted
Khomeini to affirm his own position on Zionism, the actual words
belong to Khomeini and not Ahmadinejad. Thus, Ahmadinejad has
essentially been credited (or blamed) for a quote that is not only
unoriginal, but represents a viewpoint already in place well before he
ever took office."
Professor Juan Cole concurs, arguing, "Now, some might say, "So he
didn't say, 'wipe off the map,' he said 'erase from the page.' What's
the difference? Anyway he's saying he wants to get rid of Israel.
Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of
Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up
hope -- that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued
inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah's government.
Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have
meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that 'Israel must be wiped off the map'
with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a
people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be
erased from the page of time."
|
