turns out, according to juan cole, the nyt took some liberties with translating his speech. iran is a pariah because of the statement, 'israel must be wiped off the face of the earth'. if the translation isnt accurate, why isnt iran trying to make it clear?
Cole and Christopher Hitchens have traded barbs regarding the translation and meaning of a passage referring to Israel in a speech by Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Fathi Nazila of the New York Times's Tehran bureau translated the passage as "Our dear Imam [Khomeini] said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map."[50]
In an article published at the Slate Magazine website, Hitchens accused Cole of attempting to minimize and distort the meaning of the speech, which Hitchens understood to be a repetition of "the standard line" that "the state of Israel is illegitimate and must be obliterated". Hitchens also denigrated Cole's competence in both Persian and "plain English" and described him as a Muslim apologist.[51]
Cole responded that while he personally despised "everything Ahmadinejad stands for, not to mention the odious Khomeini",[52] he nonetheless objected to the New York Times translation."[52] Cole wrote that it inaccurately suggested Ahmadinejad was advocating an invasion of Israel ("that he wants to play Hitler to Israel's Poland"). He added that a better translation of the phrase would be "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time," a metaphysical if not poetic reference rather than a militaristic one.[52] He also stated that Hitchens was incompetent to assess a Persian-to-English translation, and accused him of unethically accessing private Cole emails from an on-line discussion group.[53][54][55]
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #1 on: 2008-12-13 13:00:06 »
This is so ridiculous - and so ancient.
On the one hand we have poison-pen Hitchens, neocon apologist. We shouldn't need to look at what he is saying or whom he is opposing to know that on any Iran related issue, he is likely wrong.
Then, on the other hand you have Juan Cole, who is fluent in Arabic, Persian and Urdu, reads Turkish, is widely regarded in academia and policy circles as an authority on Middle Eastern and South Asian Islam, is the Mitchell Collegiate Professor of History at the University of Michigan and editor of numerous publications, electronic and printed, including Cambridge University Press' International Journal of Middle East Studies.
This is like comparing wonder bread from Walmart with wholegrain bread from a wood fired specialty bakery. They might both be characterized as bread, but one bite will illustrate the difference in a way that a thousand words cannot. If despite reading Cole on the subject, or (although Julian Cole [url=http://www.juancole.com/2006/06/steele-on-ahmadinejad-of-arenas-of.html]corrected Steele slightly) you still wonder about this, do the research as to who or what supports each position (Hint: Google Ahmadinejad map page time). If you do, you discover that the sources for the common "Israel must be destroyed" line are Zionist or Neocon linked, while linguists across the spectrum agree with Cole (although I grant that even MEMRI, a Zionist think-tank agrees with Julian Cole's translation.) Virginia Tilley's article, "Putting Words in Ahmadinejad's Mouth" in Counterpunch summarizes it all quite well, as does "Wiped Off The Map" - The Rumor of the Century by Arash Norouzi.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #2 on: 2008-12-13 15:15:55 »
I'm a hopeless monoglot - well, I can roughly understand the gist of Spanish, especially with the help of a little bit of context, so maybe I'm not completely hopeless. I of course have no opinion on what he actually said, but in terms of context we are talking about a man who proudly hosted a worldwide Holocaust deniers convention. So whatever actual words he says, when these sorts of things form his context, then I wouldn't be surprised if someone reasonably took away a message of existential threats towards Jews.
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #3 on: 2008-12-13 15:40:01 »
Mo,
This is a complete mischaracterization of what Ahmadinajad said and did.
Contra your assertions, Iran held a conference investigating the myth of the holocaust (as opposed to the reality which neither he nor e.g. the Jewish groups and humanist groups that were part of the conference either denied or minimized). Instead what was examined was how the myth of Israel as the permanent victim has been built around the holocaust and is used to excuse and even justify any and all brutality emanating from Israel. Which part of that was wrong? Or was the insanely clever propaganda so well done that you can't consider alternatives? I recommend the Virginia Tilley article I cited above.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
This is a complete mischaracterization of what Ahmadinajad said and did.
Contra your assertions, Iran held a conference investigating the myth of the holocaust (as opposed to the reality which neither he nor e.g. the Jewish groups and humanist groups that were part of the conference either denied or minimized). Instead what was examined was how the myth of Israel as the permanent victim has been built around the holocaust and is used to excuse and even justify any and all brutality emanating from Israel. Which part of that was wrong? Or was the insanely clever propaganda so well done that you can't consider alternatives? I recommend the Virginia Tilley article I cited above.
Kind Regards
Hermit
um, yeah. David Duke was there. Was he part of the "humanists", or the "Jews"? Or was there some other contingent there that I'm missing out on?
p.s. Although Virginia Tilley has taken an advocacy role in the issue, she herself recognizes that Ahmedinejad is a Holocaust denier. From your source above: "Middle East publics are so used to western canards legitimizing colonial or imperial takeovers that some wonder if the six-million-dead argument is just another myth or exaggerated tale. It is dismal that Mr. Ahmadinejad seems to belong to this sector."
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #5 on: 2008-12-13 17:15:59 »
Mo, I think you should know better. Or were the talk-show hosts right? If Obama shared a platform with "terrorists," is he a "terrorist" too?
Meanwhile, were 6 million Jews killed because they were Jewish? Or for a mixture of reasons (if so should the ones who died because they were socialists, communists, doctors objecting Euthanasia, atheists, anarchists, social misfits etc, be classed as "killed while being Jewish"? Given that "only" about 60% of all European Jews, and 90% or more of all European Roma were executed, why is it called "the Jewish Holocaust"? Why not "The Rom Holocaust"? The Rom don't mind sharing, but are still seeking acknowledgment that they too were victims. Acknowledgment they are aspparently denied because the idea offends Zionists.
Can you explain why Zionists object to recognizing the Holocaust of the Roma - or the earlier holocaust of the Armenians, or even Stalin's massacres (with Allied complicity) of the Poles, Ukrainian's, White Russians, and others from Eastern Europe? While examining holocausts, we should ask ourselves why the holocaust of the native population of North America is not recognized as such. After all, that amounted to around 100 million surplus deaths - which puts the concentration camp deaths in Europe - most of which happened after the US entered the war (and arguably because of the US entering the war), into a different perspective. Are you a holocaust denier like most Zionists (and possibly Ahmadinajad)?
Many peopl;e seem toi have that issue, but as I said before, that was not what Ahmadinajad's conference was about and IIRC, he directly denied the assertion that he denies an historical holocaust in an interview before it, and he certainly said that it was not his intention to address the historical holocaust (which to my mind is acknowledging it) at his conference. Instead his conference was about the myths that have developed (been developed?) around the holocaust and how they are used today. You didn't address that, which I suggest ought to be an interesting topic for anyone interested in human rights. Even if it interested David Duke for whatever reasons. Or do you think I have stepped into a logical fallacy here? If so, please explain how.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
Mo, I think you should know better. Or were the talk-show hosts right? If Obama shared a platform with "terrorists," is he a "terrorist" too?
Meanwhile, were 6 million Jews killed because they were Jewish? Or for a mixture of reasons (if so should the ones who died because they were socialists, communists, doctors objecting Euthanasia, atheists, anarchists, social misfits etc, be classed as "killed while being Jewish"? Given that "only" about 60% of all European Jews, and 90% or more of all European Roma were executed, why is it called "the Jewish Holocaust"? Why not "The Rom Holocaust"? The Rom don't mind sharing, but are still seeking acknowledgment that they too were victims. Acknowledgment they are aspparently denied because the idea offends Zionists.
Can you explain why Zionists object to recognizing the Holocaust of the Roma - or the earlier holocaust of the Armenians, or even Stalin's massacres (with Allied complicity) of the Poles, Ukrainian's, White Russians, and others from Eastern Europe? While examining holocausts, we should ask ourselves why the holocaust of the native population of North America is not recognized as such. After all, that amounted to around 100 million surplus deaths - which puts the concentration camp deaths in Europe - most of which happened after the US entered the war (and arguably because of the US entering the war), into a different perspective. Are you a holocaust denier like most Zionists (and possibly Ahmadinajad)?
Many peopl;e seem toi have that issue, but as I said before, that was not what Ahmadinajad's conference was about and IIRC, he directly denied the assertion that he denies an historical holocaust in an interview before it, and he certainly said that it was not his intention to address the historical holocaust (which to my mind is acknowledging it) at his conference. Instead his conference was about the myths that have developed (been developed?) around the holocaust and how they are used today. You didn't address that, which I suggest ought to be an interesting topic for anyone interested in human rights. Even if it interested David Duke for whatever reasons. Or do you think I have stepped into a logical fallacy here? If so, please explain how.
Perhaps you missed my PS. not really a fallacy, but you may have started your message before I added it. Your own recommended source acknowledges that Amedinejad denies the Holocaust, something even she describes as "dismal". You however seem to still say that he doesn't. Shall we start this conversation over, or should I just cancel your recommendation of her authority?
-Mo
PS. did you really just compare Obama to Ahmedinajad? You must be a neo-con!
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #7 on: 2008-12-13 18:18:01 »
[Blunderov] Whatever the true translation might be, it seems anyway absurd that the leading powers of the West should throw such a pouting hissy fit on the basis of one single, solitary remark. It is quite apparent they have nothing else to offer. It reeks of expediency and pretext; imagine if all diplomacy was conducted in this fashion?
[Blunderov] Whatever the true translation might be, it seems anyway absurd that the leading powers of the West should throw such a pouting hissy fit on the basis of one single, solitary remark. It is quite apparent they have nothing else to offer. It reeks of expediency and pretext; imagine if all diplomacy was conducted in this fashion?
Ridiculous.
Much agreed. Sarkozy is really being pointlessly dramatic. I'm looking forward to seeing the no-drama Obama approach.
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #9 on: 2008-12-13 21:21:34 »
Mo:
1) "It is dismal that Mr. Ahmadinejad seems to belong to this sector" Perception. Far from certain. Leaving open the door for alternate explanations. I try to do the same. Don't you?
2) I don't need to agree with people I cite on every possible issue. I chose her as a source because of the very broad brush she waves - and on the basis of her linguistic prowess. Wouldn't you agree?
3) I don't know enough about Obama yet to make comparisons. I suspect that he may be as clever as Ahmadinejad. He might be as compassionate too. Hopefully Obama has fewer beliefs of lower intensity - and a lower propensity to play to an audience. Given the ridiculous stories of Obama suggesting that we need to offer Israel a nuclear umbrella I suspect that Obama has already drunk the AIPAC cup to an extent where he is no longer rational - or he is much sneakier than for which I am granting him credit. When I combine that with the news that he wants to trim NASA I suspect that it can't be the latter. We will see. I'm keeping an open but skeptical mind. I recommend this as a general approach.
Blunderov:
Especially when the words were actually said by Khomeni, far nuttier (and much more dangerous) than Ahmadinejad, at a time when the US had hostages in Iran, but Israel was supplying all sorts of arms, including spares for US aircraft, to Iran. And nobody freaked out about it at all back then.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
2) I don't need to agree with people I cite on every possible issue. I chose her as a source because of the very broad brush she waves - and on the basis of her linguistic prowess. Wouldn't you agree?
Yes, but you cited her in response to my point about Ahmadinejad (Mr. A) being a holocaust denier. That certainly wasn't "every possible issue", but rather the only major issue I had cited as of that point in the conversation. Wouldn't you agree?
Mo's first statement on this topic: Quote:
I'm a hopeless monoglot - well, I can roughly understand the gist of Spanish, especially with the help of a little bit of context, so maybe I'm not completely hopeless. I of course have no opinion on what he actually said, but in terms of context we are talking about a man who proudly hosted a worldwide Holocaust deniers convention. So whatever actual words he says, when these sorts of things form his context, then I wouldn't be surprised if someone reasonably took away a message of existential threats towards Jews.
I'm willing for the sake of argument to concede that I don't really know what Mr. A said, and Ms. Tilley may in fact be correct even if her translations sound rather vague to me. However, she agrees with me that Mr. A falls dismally into the Holocaust deniers ranks.
And based on that, I'm not surprised that many people reasonably (if mistakenly) interpret these more "poetic" or otherwise possibly inscrutible translations as an existential threat to Jews given the context of Mr. A's incurious or otherwise unconcerned attitude towards the systematic attempt to exterminate of European Jews during WWII. Especially for someone who thinks its important to host a worldwide summit on the topic, I can't characterize his lack of concern as anything better than "dismal" and likely an open invitation to anyone (like Mr. Duke) who has a dogmatic or hypocritical axe to grind for Jews.
I also think this a good question:
Mermaid: Quote:
if the translation isnt accurate, why isnt iran trying to make it clear?
Anyway, as per my response to Blunderov, for the sake of real diplomacy I don't really see the point of creating needless extra drama and if Obama is willing to overlook some crazy rhetoric for the possibility of progress, I'm all for it. I think his attititude is probably better than Sarkozy's on this issue.
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #11 on: 2008-12-13 22:39:09 »
[Fritz]I had managed to miss all this and was intrigued by the discourse. The one (if I may steal a phrase [Bl.]) that got my tail all bushy was the German Youtube (in German unfortunately) it has Ahmadinejad asking the Germans whether 3 generations later they like to continue being humiliated and held back from being an activate part of the world by Israel .... hmmm ... the narrative painted below does not endear Ahmadinejad to me, and if there was a wager I'd bet on Ahmadinejad's world not including Israel, yet the western propaganda machine leaves me cold and jaded as well. It is clear to me that Palestinians are not getting a fair deal and the irony that it is largely at Israel's hand is not lost on me. I do hope Obama has the dialogue with Iran, in spite of Israel's protests.
TEHRAN, Iran - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday congratulated Barack Obama on his election win — the first time an Iranian leader has offered such wishes to a U.S. president-elect since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
An analyst said Ahmadinejad’s message was a gesture from the hard-line president that he is open to some sort of reconciliation with the U.S.
Obama has said he is willing to hold direct diplomacy with Iranian leaders as a way to break the impasse between the two countries or give the U.S. more credibility to press for tougher sanctions if talks fail. His policy marks a departure from the Bush administration, which has refused high-level engagements with Iran.
Ahmadinejad congratulated the Democrat on “attracting the majority of voters in the election,” according to excerpts carried by the official IRNA news agency.
The Iranian leader also said he hopes Obama will “use the opportunity to serve the (American) people and leave a good name for history” during his term in office.
Iran and U.S. have no formal diplomatic relations since 1979 and the hostage drama when militant Iranian students held 52 Americans captive 444 days.
Current U.S.-Iranian relations remain tense, with Washington accusing Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons and of providing support for Shiite militants who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq — charges Iran denies.
Israeli foreign minister warns against dialogue In Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, a contender for prime minister in her country’s elections, warned against any dialogue with Iran — a first sign of Israeli disagreement with the incoming U.S. administration.
“Dialogue at this time is liable to broadcast weakness,” cautioned Livni, who is head of the governing Kadima Party. “I think early dialogue at a time when it appears to Iran that the world has given up on sanctions could be problematic.”
Israeli officials describe Iran as the biggest threat to the Jewish state’s existence, citing Ahmadinejad’s frequent calls for Israel’s destruction and its development of long-range missiles capable of striking the Jewish state.
Livni has repeatedly said she hopes international diplomacy prevails. But she doesn’t rule out force if U.N. sanctions don’t pressure Iran to scale back its nuclear aims. In June, she said Iran “needs to understand the military threat exists and is not being taken off the table.”
Iran sees Obama’s victory as a triumph over the policies of President Bush, who repeatedly clashed with Iranian leaders while in office over Iran’s nuclear program and its opposition to the U.S.-led military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Ahmadinejad’s message said that “nations of the world” expect changes from Obama — mostly that he will change U.S. foreign policy.
[Fritz]I had managed to miss all this and was intrigued by the discourse. The one (if I may steal a phrase [Bl.]) that got my tail all bushy was the German Youtube (in German unfortunately) it has Ahmadinejad asking the Germans whether 3 generations later they like to continue being humiliated and held back from being an activate part of the world by Israel .... hmmm ... the narrative painted below does not endear Ahmadinejad to me, and if there was a wager I'd bet on Ahmadinejad's world not including Israel, yet the western propaganda machine leaves me cold and jaded as well. It is clear to me that Palestinians are not getting a fair deal and the irony that it is largely at Israel's hand is not lost on me. I do hope Obama has the dialogue with Iran, in spite of Israel's protests.
I'm with you on this. I don't see any reason that Iran could seriously threaten to wipe the US off the maps (although our own occassional bouts of neo-con stupidities could eventually accomplish that for them). So whatever threats he has for Israel, should not prevent the US (Obama) from at least attempting better engagement with Iran. Indeed if he is successful, it could and likely would help some of Israel's security issues. It may not work, and that's the risk of it of course, but with our habit of regularly changing administrations, its a risk we can better afford than more dynastically oriented nations, and Israel would still be no worse off than she already is. I certainly wouldn't expect the Israelis to achieve any peace with Iran on their own for the forseeable future.
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #13 on: 2008-12-14 09:29:11 »
mo, other than david duke, the ultra orthodox satmar hasidic jews attended the iran conference as well. not because they deny the holocaust, but because they are against the zionist agenda.
[...] A handful of Orthodox Jews have attended Iran's controversial conference questioning the Nazi genocide of the Jews - not because they deny the Holocaust but because they object to using it as justification for the existence of Israel.
With their distinctive hats, beards and side locks, these men may, to the untrained eye, look like any other Orthodox believers in Jerusalem or New York. But the Jews who went to Tehran are different.
Some of them belong to Neturei Karta (Guardians of the City), a Hasidic sect of a few thousand people which views Zionism - the movement to establish a Jewish national home or state in what was Palestine - as a "poison" threatening "true Jews".
A representative, UK-based Rabbi Aharon Cohen, told the conference he prayed "that the underlying cause of strife and bloodshed in the Middle East, namely the state known as Israel, be totally and peacefully dissolved".
In its place, Rabbi Cohen said, should be "a regime fully in accordance with the aspirations of the Palestinians when Arab and Jew will be able to live peacefully together as they did for centuries".
Neturei Karta believes the very idea of an Israeli state goes against the Jewish religion.
The book of Jewish law or Talmud, they say, teaches that believers may not use human force to create a Jewish state before the coming of the Messiah.
But how do Neturei Karta and other Orthodox Jews such as Austria-based Rabbi Moishe Ayre Friedman justify attending such a controversial conference?
Rabbi Friedman told BBC Radio 4's PM programme that he was not in Tehran to debate whether the Holocaust happened or not, but to look at its lessons.
He says the Holocaust was being used to legitimise the suffering of other peoples and he wanted to break what he called a taboo on discussing it.
The main thing, he argued, was not Jewish suffering in the past but the use of the Holocaust as a "tool of commercial, military and media power".
In what many other Jews would consider the height of naivety, he commended Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for wanting "a secured future for innocent Jewish people in Europe and elsewhere".
In his speech to the conference, Neturei Karta's Rabbi Cohen said there was no doubt about the Holocaust and it would be "a terrible affront to the memory of those who perished to belittle the guilt of the crime in any way".
However, he also argued that the genocide had been divine will. "The Zionists, with their secular pompous approach behave in complete opposition to this philosophy and dare to say 'Never Again'.
"They have the audacity to think that they can prevent the Almighty from repeating a Holocaust. This is heresy."
Neturei Karta's views are regarded with abhorrence by most other Orthodox Jews, according to Rabbi Jeremy Rosen of the Yakar centre in London.
"And I think, frankly, even among the Hasidic world, by and large Neturei Karta are regarded as freaks," the Orthodox rabbi told the BBC News website. [...]
honestly, i think these are loonier nutcases than the khomeini..but thats another topic.
iran, apparently, hosted it because holocaust denial is banned in europe. talk about 'free speech' is cheap. can you imagine being jailed for saying that 3000+ people really didnt die on 9/11(its a lousy parallel, but honestly thts the most tragic thing tht has happened to the states since the civil war...and that which without proportion has lead to not one, but two global wars along with complete seizure of constitutional freedom in this country. more people probably died outside american borders protecting american oil interests than on 9/11which is citied as the cause of these wars...but thts another story and doesnt belong in this thread.)
(this is proof positive that freedom of speech is precious and should be defended everywhere in the world..look at what curtailing free speech leads to...whatever one may say..even in its currently handicapped state, the first amendment is the single most beautiful characteristic of america...its uniquely american and honestly, i havent seen it anywhere else in the world..p.s. oops..with the exception of some scandinavian countries, probably)
Manouchehr Mottaki told participants the event did not seek to confirm or deny the Holocaust, but rather to allow people to "express their views freely".
Israel's prime minister has condemned the gathering as "a sick phenomenon".
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has questioned the scale of the Holocaust, in which six million Jews died.
According to the foreign ministry in Tehran, 67 researchers from 30 countries are attending the conference in Iran, which is home to 25,000 Jews.
Holocaust evidence
Participants include a number of well-known "revisionist" Western academics. American David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, is to present a paper.
But a small group of Jewish rabbis are also there. One, British Rabbi Ahron Cohen, said he had come to the conference to put the "Orthodox Jewish viewpoint" across.
"We certainly say there was a Holocaust, we lived through the Holocaust. But in no way can it be used as a justification for perpetrating unjust acts against the Palestinians," he said.
His group, Neturei Karta, believes the very idea of an Israeli state goes against the Jewish religion.
Neturei Karta's views are regarded with abhorrence by most other Orthodox Jews, according to Rabbi Jeremy Rosen of the Yakar centre in London.
"And I think, frankly, even among the Hasidic world, by and large Neturei Karta are regarded as freaks," the Orthodox rabbi told the BBC News website.
'Express views freely'
Opening the conference, Mr Mottaki said the aim of the conference was "not to deny or confirm the Holocaust".
"Its main aim is to create an opportunity for thinkers who cannot express their views freely in Europe about the Holocaust," he said.
Mr Mottaki dismissed foreign criticism as "predictable", telling delegates there was "no logical reason" to oppose the conference.
In a recorded address broadcast to the nation, President Ahmadinejad questioned why the West would not allow "any investigation" into the Holocaust.
Mr Ahmadinejad has repeatedly downplayed the extent of the Holocaust, describing it as a myth used to justify the existence of Israel and oppression of the Palestinians. He has called for Israel to be dismantled.
But in a number of European countries - including Germany, Austria and France - it is illegal to deny the Holocaust. An Austrian court jailed Briton David Irving for three years on charges of Holocaust denial.
'Negative impression'
Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert condemned the conference as "a sick phenomenon that shows the depths of hatred of the fundamentalist Iranian regime".
Norbert Lammert, president of the German parliament, sent a letter to Mr Ahmadinejad criticising the event.
Members of a Jewish group listen to the conference speeches Some Jewish rabbis are at the conference to put their views across "I condemn any attempt to offer anti-Semitic propaganda a public forum under the pretext of scientific freedom and objectivity," he wrote.
A number of prominent Holocaust historians are attending a rival gathering taking place in Berlin, backed by the German government, in protest at the Tehran conference.
The US state department last week described the Iranian event as "yet another disgraceful act on this particular subject by the regime in Tehran".
Iran knows this conference is going to cause outrage abroad but it says it wants to test the limits of the West's commitment to freedom of speech, says the BBC's correspondent in Tehran, Frances Harrison.
Iran is drawing a parallel with the Danish cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, which provoked outrage in the Islamic world but were defended by Western liberals, she says.
Iran's one Jewish MP, Morris Motamed, told the BBC he opposed the conference.
"Holding this conference after having a competition of cartoons about the Holocaust has put a lot of pressure on Jews all over the world and it can give nations and governments a very negative impression of Iran," he said.
Re:did ahmadinejad really say that israel must be wiped off the face of the eart
« Reply #14 on: 2008-12-14 09:33:37 »
Mo, to seriously take ahmadinejad's statement about 'wiping off israel'(if he indeed said that) is to not understand the middle eastern way of exaggerated and colourful rhetoric. it is truly something that you have to see/hear it to believe it. for heads of countries to use that soundbyte to refuse to even shake his hand is not only childish, but also extremely uneducated about the nuances of talk and political talk of the region.
(remember..the only letter of congratulation that obama ignored was ahmedinejad's...also remember that the letter of congratulation for an american president-to-be's win is almost never done...)
[Fritz]I had managed to miss all this and was intrigued by the discourse. The one (if I may steal a phrase [Bl.]) that got my tail all bushy was the German Youtube (in German unfortunately) it has Ahmadinejad asking the Germans whether 3 generations later they like to continue being humiliated and held back from being an activate part of the world by Israel .... hmmm ... the narrative painted below does not endear Ahmadinejad to me, and if there was a wager I'd bet on Ahmadinejad's world not including Israel, yet the western propaganda machine leaves me cold and jaded as well. It is clear to me that Palestinians are not getting a fair deal and the irony that it is largely at Israel's hand is not lost on me. I do hope Obama has the dialogue with Iran, in spite of Israel's protests.
I'm with you on this. I don't see any reason that Iran could seriously threaten to wipe the US off the maps (although our own occassional bouts of neo-con stupidities could eventually accomplish that for them). So whatever threats he has for Israel, should not prevent the US (Obama) from at least attempting better engagement with Iran. Indeed if he is successful, it could and likely would help some of Israel's security issues. It may not work, and that's the risk of it of course, but with our habit of regularly changing administrations, its a risk we can better afford than more dynastically oriented nations, and Israel would still be no worse off than she already is. I certainly wouldn't expect the Israelis to achieve any peace with Iran on their own for the forseeable future.
Author
Logged
