In Jacky's world the Arab nations were the victims of Israel starting lots of wars of annihilation instead of the real world where it was the other way round
Scaremongering with no basis. Can we see the information upon which these "intelligence estimates", that i sincerily doubt exist, were based? Again they state that Iran vowed to "wipe Israel off the map" yet I have shown many times over the course of this thread that was a gross and intentional misquote. Why would Iran, who has been one of America's biggest regional aids in countering Al Qaeda, transfer its nuclear capabilities to terrorists, idle speculation! Islamic radicals eager for martyrdom? Not only highly inaccuracte with regards to Irans stance on such extremism, it also verges on racist stereotyping. Where did you pull that little gem out of?
Well yes, the conflict started when the jewish settlers, put there by the British, created paramilitaries to go into armed conflict against the British forces in the region.
LONDON, Oct. 27 -- Leaders around the world on Thursday condemned a call by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that Israel be "wiped off the map," and a top Iranian official said that mass demonstrations in his country on Friday would rebuff the rising criticism from abroad. "I have never come across a situation of the president of a country saying they want to . . . wipe out another country," British Prime Minister Tony Blair said at a summit outside London of the 25 leaders of the European Union's member states. Blair said Ahmadinejad's comment was "completely and totally unacceptable." In a joint statement, the E.U. leaders "condemned in the strongest terms" the Iranian president's call, saying it "will cause concern about Iran's role in the region and its future intentions." President Jacques Chirac of France told reporters that Ahmadinejad risked Iran "being left on the outside of other nations." Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, in Israel, called the Iranian president's statement "unacceptable." The statement was widely reported in the Arab world; leaders there reacted for the most part with silence. Most Arab countries have no diplomatic relations with Israel. But the Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said, according to the Associated Press: "We have recognized the state of Israel and we are pursuing a peace process with Israel, and . . . we do not accept the statements of the president of Iran. This is unacceptable." U.S. and European leaders have grown increasingly worried about the bellicose attitude of Iran at a time when it is pursuing a nuclear program that they have said may be intended to produce a nuclear weapon. The E.U. has engaged in contentious and so far unsuccessful negotiations with Iran to try to persuade it to drop parts of the program that could be used to make bombs. Iran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and aimed at generating electric power for its citizens. Iran's foreign minister said mass public demonstrations were planned for Friday in Tehran, the Iranian capital, to show support for the country's president. Manouchehr Mottaki was quoted on state-run television saying that the "Zionist regime is illegitimate" and that "the world will see the anger of the Islamic world against this regime." Ahmadinejad made his remarks in a speech Wednesday to 4,000 students attending a conference called "The World Without Zionism." He was quoting the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led the 1979 Islamic revolution that established Iran's theocratic government and made fierce opposition to Israel a matter of political orthodoxy. Ahmadinejad also called the 1948 establishment of Israel, on territory also claimed by Palestinians, the fall of "the last trench of Islam." Virulent anti-Israel sentiment remains strong in the hard-line circles from which Ahmadinejad emerged to win the presidential election in June. "Israel Should Be Wiped Off the Map" was the slogan draped on a Shahab-3 ballistic missile during a military parade in Tehran a month ago. Six of the missiles, which, with a 1,250 mile range, could reach Israel, were the high point of the parade. "We Will Trample America Under Our Feet," read another banner. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/27/AR2005102702221.html The European Leaders' (and Saeb Erekat of Palestine) translators must have had an off day jacky?
please log in to view this image Banner on side of Shahab-3 Missile says: Israel should be wiped out of the face of the world. Some of the missiles had banners saying, Israel should be wiped off the map and We will trample America under our feet,Death to America,and Death to Israel.The banners and verbal attacks prompted a number of European military attaches, from France, Italy, Greece, and Poland, to leave the parade. One diplomat is quoted as saying, "there was a common position among the European Union members that, if the military parade included any slogans that attacked our allies, we would leave.
The Guardian - President Ahmadenijad lost in translation My recent comment piece explaining how Iran's president was badly misquoted when he allegedly called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" has caused a welcome little storm. The phrase has been seized on by western and Israeli hawks to re-double suspicions of the Iranian government's intentions, so it is important to get the truth of what he really said. I took my translation - "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" - from the indefatigable Professor Juan Cole's website where it has been for several weeks. But it seems to be mainly thanks to the Guardian giving it prominence that the New York Times, which was one of the first papers to misquote Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, came out on Sunday with a defensive piece attempting to justify its reporter's original "wiped off the map" translation. (By the way, for Farsi speakers the original version is available here.) Joining the "off the map" crowd is David Aaronovitch, a columnist on the Times (of London), who attacked my analysis yesterday. I won't waste time on him since his knowledge of Farsi is as minimal as that of his Latin. The poor man thinks the plural of casus belli is casi belli, unaware that casus is fourth declension with the plural casus (long u). The New York Times's Ethan Bronner and Nazila Fathi, one of the paper's Tehran staff, make a more serious case. They consulted several sources in Tehran. "Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran's most prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say 'wipe off' or 'wipe away' is more accurate than 'vanish' because the Persian verb is active and transitive," Bronner writes. The New York Times goes on: "The second translation issue concerns the word 'map'. Khomeini's words were abstract: 'Sahneh roozgar.' Sahneh means scene or stage, and roozgar means time. The phrase was widely interpreted as 'map', and for years, no one objected. In October, when Mr Ahmadinejad quoted Khomeini, he actually misquoted him, saying not 'Sahneh roozgar' but 'Safheh roozgar', meaning pages of time or history. No one noticed the change, and news agencies used the word 'map' again." This, in my view, is the crucial point and I'm glad the NYT accepts that the word "map" was not used by Ahmadinejad. (By the way, the Wikipedia entry on the controversy gets the NYT wrong, claiming falsely that Ethan Bronner "concluded that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map".) If the Iranian president made a mistake and used "safheh" rather than "sahneh", that is of little moment. A native English speaker could equally confuse "stage of history" with "page of history". The significant issue is that both phrases refer to time rather than place. As I wrote in my original post, the Iranian president was expressing a vague wish for the future. He was not threatening an Iranian-initiated war to remove Israeli control over Jerusalem. Two other well-established translation sources confirm that Ahmadinejad was referring to time, not place. The version of the October 26 2005 speech put out by the Middle East Media Research Institute, based on the Farsi text released by the official Iranian Students News Agency, says: "This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history." (NB: not "wiped". I accept that "eliminated" is almost the same, indeed some might argue it is more sinister than "wiped", though it is a bit more of a mouthful if you are trying to find four catchy and easily memorable words with which to incite anger against Iran.) MEMRI (its text of the speech is available here) is headed by a former Isareli military intelligence officer and has sometimes been attacked for alleged distortion of Farsi and Arabic quotations for the benefit of Israeli foreign policy. On this occasion they supported the doveish view of what Ahmadinejad said. Finally we come to the BBC monitoring service which every day puts out hundreds of highly respected English translations of broadcasts from all round the globe to their subscribers - mainly governments, intelligence services, thinktanks and other specialists. I approached them this week about the controversy and a spokesperson for the monitoring service's marketing unit, who did not want his name used, told me their original version of the Ahmadinejad quote was "eliminated from the map of the world". As a result of my inquiry and the controversy generated, they had gone back to the native Farsi-speakers who had translated the speech from a voice recording made available by Iranian TV on October 29 2005. Here is what the spokesman told me about the "off the map" section: "The monitor has checked again. It's a difficult expression to translate. They're under time pressure to produce a translation quickly and they were searching for the right phrase. With more time to reflect they would say the translation should be "eliminated from the page of history". Would the BBC put out a correction, given that the issue had become so controversial, I asked. "It would be a long time after the original version", came the reply. I interpret that as "probably not", but let's see. Finally, I approached Iradj Bagherzade, the Iranian-born founder and chairman of the renowned publishing house, IB Tauris. He thought hard about the word "roozgar". "History" was not the right word, he said, but he could not decide between several better alternatives "this day and age", "these times", "our times", "time". So there we have it. Starting with Juan Cole, and going via the New York Times' experts through MEMRI to the BBC's monitors, the consensus is that Ahmadinejad did not talk about any maps. He was, as I insisted in my original piece, offering a vague wish for the future. A very last point. 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 favour Iran's removal from the page of time. He just wanted the Shah out. The same with regard to Israel. The Iranian president is undeniably an opponent of Zionism or, if you prefer the phrase, the Zionist regime. But so are substantial numbers of Israeli citizens, Jews as well as Arabs. The anti-Zionist and non-Zionist traditions in Israel are not insignificant. So we should not demonise Ahmadinejad on those grounds alone. Does this quibbling over phrases matter? Yes, of course. Within days of the Ahmadinejad speech the then Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, was calling for Iran to be expelled from the United Nations. Other foreign leaders have quoted the map phrase. The United States is piling pressure on its allies to be tough with Iran. Let me give the last word to Juan Cole, with whom I began. "I am entirely aware that Ahmadinejad is hostile to Israel. The question is whether his intentions and capabilities would lead to a military attack, and whether therefore pre-emptive warfare is prescribed. I am saying no, and the boring philology is part of the reason for the no."
I haven't been through this whole thread, but can I ask why you're making the claim that Ahmadinejad has been intentionally misquoted, Jack? I've already proven to you that this isn't true. The quote may not be entirely accurate, but it's how it was reported by Iran's state run news channel and the man's own website. The fact that Ahmadinejad was actually quoting someone else when he said it and got the quote wrong seems to have been missed, too. As the original statement was made by Ruhollah Khomeini, what do you think he meant by it? You know, the bloke that wanted Salman Rushdie dead for writing a book.
Iranian woman's life saved via e-mail advice from Israel Although the leaders of Iran regard Israel as a Satan to be destroyed by nuclear weapons, Israeli medicine is regarded as excellent by some Iranian doctors, including one who consulted a senior physician at Kaplan Medical Center and prevented complications that would have risked a pregnant woman’s life. Dr. Adi Weissbuch of the unit for at-risk pregnancies at the Rehovot hospital was recently contacted with urgency via e-mail by a woman doctor who identified herself as "N.N." from an Iranian university hospital. She had read a comprehensive article published in an international medical journal in which Weissbuch wrote about a rare genetic complication of pregnancy and supplied his e-mail address in Israel at the bottom. Consultation was urgent, the Iranian doctor wrote, because according to Islamic law, abortion is forbidden after the 18th week of pregnancy, and her patient was already in her 16th week. She sent the Kaplan physician a copy of lab results and asked his opinion. Weissbuch wrote back that on the basis of the data, there was very little chance that the woman would have a healthy baby and that delivering the baby would endanger her life. The Rehovot doctor had discussed a very similar case in his journal article. After receiving the information, the Iranian doctor advised the woman to undergo an abortion immediately, and she did so. Weissbuch said that he had received numerous requests for medical help via e-mail from various parts of the world, but that this was the first time one had come from Iran. "For me as a doctor, caring for patients is not dependent on nationality, gender or religion. We are morally bound to give proper treatment and advice to whoever needs it. From my side,of course all of my correspondence with the Iranian physician mentioned ‘The State of Israel’ under my full name, but she was not dissuaded by this fact," he said. Those pesky Israelis at it again, I see.
Iran wages its wars by proxy - Hezbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. The Iranians were behind the terrorist attacks in Argentina in 1992 & 1994 which left 114 dead and over 500 injured. The Iranians were responsible for huge numbers of dead and wounded in Iraq after the second Gulf War. And for your information, Arabs are from Arabia, so how on earth can Jews, who are the indigenous people of Israel, possibly be "occupying Arab lands"?
THFC harping on again about how Israelis have a biblical right to the land. He doesnt realise the indigenous palestinians have ancestry to the Jews of the area 2000 years ago, the current population of Jews planted there by the British have practically none
You were making sense until the indigenous people of Israel part........ So you are a Spurs fan and a Jew, stereotype city . I think i saw you in the Clarks factory outlet in Seven Sisters rd... I bet you are good with money too? please log in to view this image
How about the proxy war the US/Israel waged against Iran using Iraq as their stooge. That war killed 1,000,000 Iranians and the devastated infrastructure of the country includes a massive hole in the power grid, something atomic energy would be able to fill nicely
