Ok, my bad. I get a bit defensive on these boards. I think you can look to Byrnzie to see why.
well byrnzie is tenaciously passionate ill give him that. and i understand that he sees what israel is doing to the palestinians as heinous in the extreme. many people do. and like many people he doesnt give an inch to the apologists. many people dont. and that was a general statement. and i understand as a jew you may take it somewhat personally.
Why bother on the board? Curiosity for one. Opinion here is much more on the fringes. It's sort of a novelty. Every now and then someone reasonable will come along and I'll actually learn something. So there's that. I enjoy arguments, although it can get old here pretty quickly sometimes.
Like I said, it's my opinion. To me it comes off as hatred.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
I have my disagreements with many here, who I think have a very lop-sided view of the world.
A lop-sided view of the world? Actually, most people on this board agree with the broad consensus of the international community which - based on U.N Resolution 242 which calls for a full and immediate Israeli withdrawal from the territories it occupied in June 1967 - is as follows:
Peaceful Settlement of The Question of Palestine
November 26, 2008, the United Nations General Assembly, as it does every year, voted on a resolution to end the Israel Palestine conflict. The GA/ 10791 (documents A/63/L.35; A/63/L.36) called for a two state settlement on the 1967 borders, East Jerusalem for the Palestinian State (west for Israel), and a “just” resolution to the refugee problem
The draft resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine (document A/63/L.35) was adopted by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 7 against, with 3 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Australia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, United States.
Judging from the above I think it's pretty clear that it's not the pro-Palestinians on this board who have a lop-sided view of the world.
I have my disagreements with many here, who I think have a very lop-sided view of the world.
A lop-sided view of the world? Actually, most people on this board agree with the broad consensus of the international community which - based on U.N Resolution 242 which calls for a full and immediate Israeli withdrawal from the territories it occupied in June 1967 - is as follows:
Peaceful Settlement of The Question of Palestine
November 26, 2008, the United Nations General Assembly, as it does every year, voted on a resolution to end the Israel Palestine conflict. The GA/ 10791 (documents A/63/L.35; A/63/L.36) called for a two state settlement on the 1967 borders, East Jerusalem for the Palestinian State (west for Israel), and a “just” resolution to the refugee problem
The draft resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine (document A/63/L.35) was adopted by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 7 against, with 3 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Australia,...
Judging from the above I think it's pretty clear that it's not the pro-Palestinians on this board who have a lop-sided view of the world.
just awesome. :roll: :insert shaking head here:
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
chances are most people would be just fine letting their neighbor make a living and raise his kids. put government and religion into it...and you have occupation and brutality and idiocy. put american media, supplemented by $2 billion annually form Israel....you have apartheid.
Sure, and I'm happy for you that you can get away with slinging cheap shots all day long while others get banned for such things. Must be nice to be afforded such special status.
Yes, there is evidence he is a holocaust denier. Just look up his numerous quotes on the subject.
Such as?
Edit: And I'm not asking for you to selectively choose some words out of context like you did above. I'd like to see the quotes in full and not from some sabre-rattling Jewish website.
I didn't selectively choose anything. I quoted directly from the quote you provided in your own post. But please, enlighten me as to how it is that questioning whether the holocaust actually happened isn't tantamount to holocaust denial?
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
I didn't selectively choose anything. I quoted directly from the quote you provided in your own post. But please, enlighten me as to how it is that questioning whether the holocaust actually happened isn't tantamount to holocaust denial?
He didn't question whether the holocaust happened. Anyone who reads the passage I pasted here can see that - any honest person that is.
In 2003 did you believe Bush and Blair when they told you that Iraq was a threat to the world and that they possessed weapons of mass destruction that could land in our cities in 45 minutes?
oh no i'm not saying i actually agree or disagree with you, you asked where and i pointed out where, that brian Williams interview was a clarification of that quote,
The words that came out of his mouth, verbatim, that you quoted, were "if this event happened." You don't ask "if" an event happened unless there is some question in your mind as to whether it did, in fact, occur.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
The words that came out of his mouth, verbatim, that you quoted, were "if this event happened." You don't ask "if" an event happened unless there is some question in your mind as to whether it did, in fact, occur.
i think what ahmadinejad was saying in the brian williams interview is out of the 60 million people to die in ww2 why do the jews get "special treatment". i think that is more his point than denying the holocost,
So then what's the explanation for the whole bit about how the holocaust should be open to research? It is open to research. There are hundreds of scholars working on the subject. It's probably one of the most researched events in history. The only "research" that anyone frowns on is the sort that sets out to dispute whether the holocaust happened. So when Ahmadinejad talks about research being curtailed, and researchers being jailed, he is explicitly referring to holocaust deniers.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
The International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust was a two-day conference that opened on December 11, 2006, in Tehran, Iran. The Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said the conference sought "neither to deny nor prove the Holocaust... [but] to provide an appropriate scientific atmosphere for scholars to offer their opinions in freedom about a historical issue." The 67 attendees from 30 countries included...the American David Duke, former member of the Louisiana House of Representatives and Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan...Holocaust deniers Robert Faurisson and Fredrick Töben...
The conference was widely described as a "Holocaust denial conference" or a "meeting of Holocaust deniers", and provoked worldwide criticism. Out of a total of 33 reports given at the conference, 6 were given by holocaust deniers.
American David Duke, a former Louisiana State Representative and one-time Ku Klux Klan leader, attended the conference. French writer Georges Thiel, who had been convicted under Holocaust denial laws in France, attended, as did Fredrick Töben of Australia who had been imprisoned in Germany for three months in 1999 for Holocaust denial. Robert Faurisson, a convicted Holocaust denier from France also attended, as well as Ahmed Rami, a Swedish-Moroccan Holocaust denier who was imprisoned in Sweden for inciting racial hatred...French Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy was unable to attend the conference for health reasons.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Like the ‘wipe Israel off the map’ fiasco, you have to consider the source of the translation.
The same contextual problems arise when comparing Western translations to the translation of the Iranian press. Which translation would be more accurate? The ones marketed to people who have no idea if it’s correct (literally or contextually)…? Could the IRNA publicly misinterpreted/mistranslate Ahmadinejad without it being corrected immediately? I doubt it.
…whether or not you agree with his assertions and opinions….you have to admit that the Western translations changed the context, and downplayed criticism of Israel.
Does Iran's President deny the Holocaust?
What is this assertion based on? In substance it is based on dispatches of 2 days - 2005-12-14 and 2006-02-11.
"The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and the Western states and has denied the Holocaust. Instead of making Israel's attacks against Palestine a subject of discussion 'the Western states devote their energy to the fairy-tale of the massacre against the Jews', Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday in a speech at Zahedan in the south-east of Iran which was broadcasted directly by the news-channel Khabar. That day he stated that if the Western states really believe in the assassination of six million Jews in W.W. II they should put a piece of land in Europe, in the USA, Canada or Alaska at Israel's disposal." – dispatch of the German press agency DPA, 2005-12-14.
The German TV-station n24 spreads the following on 2006-12-14 using the title 'Iran's President calls the Holocaust a myth': "The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and called the Holocaust a 'myth' used as a pretext by the Europeans to found a Jewish state in the center of the Islamic world . 'In the name of the Holocaust they have created a myth and regard it to be worthier than God, religion and the prophets' the Iranian head of state said."
The Iranian press agency IRNA .renders Ahmadinejad on 2005-12-14 as follows: "'If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions.' [...] 'If you have committed the crimes so give a piece of your land somewhere in Europe or America and Canada or Alaska to them to set up their own state there.' [...] Ahmadinejad said some have created a myth on holocaust and hold it even higher than the very belief in religion and prophets [...] The president further said, 'If your civilization consists of aggression, displacing the oppressed nations, suppressing justice-seeking voices and spreading injustice and poverty for the majority of people on the earth, then we say it out loud that we despise your hollow civilization.'"
There again we find the quotation already rendered by n24: "In the name of the Holocaust they created a myth." We can see that this is completely different from what is published by e.g. the DPA - the massacre against the Jews is a fairy-tale. What Ahmadinejad does is not denying the Holocaust. No! It is dealing out criticism against the mendacity of the imperialistic powers who use the Holocaust to muzzle critical voices and to achieve advantages concerning the legitimization of a planned war. This is criticism against the exploitation of the Holocaust.
CNN (2005-12-15)renders as follows: "If you have burned the Jews why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel. Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?"
The Washingtonian ''Middle East Media Research Institute' (MEMRI) renders Ahmadinejad's statements from 2005-12-14 as follows: "...we ask you: if you indeed committed this great crime, why should the oppressed people of Palestine be punished for it? * [...] If you committed a crime, you yourselves should pay for it. Our offer was and remains as follows: If you committed a crime, it is only appropriate that you place a piece of your land at their disposal - a piece of Europe, of America, of Canada, or of Alaska - so they can establish their own state. Rest assured that if you do so, the Iranian people will voice no objection."
The MEMRI-rendering uses the relieving translation 'great crime' and misappropriates the following sentence at the * marked passage: "Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions." This sentence has obviously been left out deliberately because it would intimate why the Israeli state could have forfeited the right to establish itself in Palestine - videlicet because of its aggressive expansionist policy against the people of Palestine, ignoring any law of nations and disobeying all UN-resolutions.
In spite of the variability referring to the rendering of the statements of Iran's President we should nevertheless note down: the reproach of denying the Holocaust cannot be sustained if Ahmadinejad speaks of a great and huge crime that has been done to the Jews.
In another IRNA-dispatch (2005-12-14) .the Arabian author Ghazi Abu Daqa writes about Ahmadinejad: "The Iranian president has nothing against the followers of Judaism [...] Ahmadinejad is against Zionism as well as its expansionist and occupying policy. That is why he managed to declare to the world with courage that there is no place for the Zionist regime in the world civilized community."
It's no wonder that such opinions do not go down particularly well with the ideas of the centers of power in the Western world. But for this reason they are not wrong right away. Dealing out criticism against the aggressive policy of the Western world, to which Israel belongs as well, is not yet anti-Semitism. We should at least to give audience to this kind of criticism - even if it is a problematic field for us.
2006-02-11 Ahmadinejad said according to IRNA: "[...] the real holocaust should be sought in Palestine, where the blood of the oppressed nation is shed every day and Iraq, where the defenceless Muslim people are killed daily. [...] 'Some western governments, in particular the US, approve of the sacrilege on the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), while denial of the >Myth of Holocaust<, based on which the Zionists have been exerting pressure upon other countries for the past 60 years and kill the innocent Palestinians, is considered as a crime' [...]"
The assertion that Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust thus is wrong in more than one aspect. He does not deny the Holocaust, but speaks of denial itself. And he does not speak of denial of the Holocaust, but of denial of the Myth of Holocaust. This is something totally different. All in all he speaks of the exploitation of the Holocaust. The Myth of Holocaust, like it is made a subject of discussion by Ahmadinejad, is a myth that has been built up in conjunction with the Holocaust to - as he says - put pressure onto somebody. We might follow this train of thoughts or we might not. But we cannot equalize his thoughts with denial of the Holocaust.
If Ahmadinejad according to this 2006-02-11 condemns the fact that it is forbidden and treated as a crime to do research into the Myth of Holocaust, as we find it quoted in the MEMRI translation, this acquires a meaning much different from the common and wide-spread one. If the myth related to the Holocaust is commuted to a 'Fairy Tale of the Massacre' - like the DPA did - this can only be understood as a malicious misinterpretation.
By the use of misrepresentation and adulteration it apparently succeeded to constitute the statements of the Iranian President to be part and parcel of the currently fought propaganda battle. It is our responsibility to counter this.
The International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust was a two-day conference that opened on December 11, 2006, in Tehran, Iran. The Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said the conference sought "neither to deny nor prove the Holocaust... [but] to provide an appropriate scientific atmosphere for scholars to offer their opinions in freedom about a historical issue." The 67 attendees from 30 countries included...the American David Duke, former member of the Louisiana House of Representatives and Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan...Holocaust deniers Robert Faurisson and Fredrick Töben...
The conference was widely described as a "Holocaust denial conference" or a "meeting of Holocaust deniers", and provoked worldwide criticism. Out of a total of 33 reports given at the conference, 6 were given by holocaust deniers.
American David Duke, a former Louisiana State Representative and one-time Ku Klux Klan leader, attended the conference. French writer Georges Thiel, who had been convicted under Holocaust denial laws in France, attended, as did Fredrick Töben of Australia who had been imprisoned in Germany for three months in 1999 for Holocaust denial. Robert Faurisson, a convicted Holocaust denier from France also attended, as well as Ahmed Rami, a Swedish-Moroccan Holocaust denier who was imprisoned in Sweden for inciting racial hatred...French Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy was unable to attend the conference for health reasons.
Ok, that's very fancy footwork, but I think when you look at his record, which is lengthy, of shady comments on the matter, plus the conference, plus the evasions when asked about the issue, I think it is pretty hard, if you're objective, not to think that he's a denier (albeit one who is clever enough to phrase his denials as mere "questions," or to shroud his denial in the politics of Israel-Palestine). In my opinion he is a holocaust denier. He does just enough to allow his apologists to argue otherwise, but I think to objective eyes and ears his words speak for themselves. Which is probably why virtually the entire world, including now Fidel Castro (no lover of Israel or America) has condemned him for exactly this.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Because I'm not interested in getting into a discussion about Neturei Karta (basically they will get in bed with anybody who's against Israel), and because I wanted to make a narrow point about holocaust denial. I wasn't trying to hide anything, just to emphasize my point.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Ok, that's very fancy footwork, but I think when you look at his record, which is lengthy, of shady comments on the matter, plus the conference, plus the evasions when asked about the issue, I think it is pretty hard, if you're objective, not to think that he's a denier (albeit one who is clever enough to phrase his denials as mere "questions," or to shroud his denial in the politics of Israel-Palestine). In my opinion he is a holocaust denier. He does just enough to allow his apologists to argue otherwise, but I think to objective eyes and ears his words speak for themselves. Which is probably why virtually the entire world, including now Fidel Castro (no lover of Israel or America) has condemned him for exactly this.
I'd like to have a look at this lengthy record if you've got any other instances to share...
The fancy footwork is not Ahmadinejad's, it is the media's. I find it interesting that you consider asking questions a 'shroud' for denial...he is obviously trying to frame his words carefully...maybe it is in order to hide his true intent...but maybe it is in order to avoid detracting from the questions he is asking? Seems the questions themselves are enough to discredit him in the eyes of some (most).
I don't think focusing on your own opinion, an inference, as opposed to addressing the valid points he makes, constitutes objectivity. The statements are regretful, especially considering the opportunity it affords his critics to avoid the underlying questions he asks. Although...if not for the comments about the holocaust, and the opportunity to villify him, these statements never would have seen the light of day in the West.
The International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust was a two-day conference that opened on December 11, 2006, in Tehran, Iran. The Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said the conference sought "neither to deny nor prove the Holocaust... [but] to provide an appropriate scientific atmosphere for scholars to offer their opinions in freedom about a historical issue." The 67 attendees from 30 countries included...the American David Duke, former member of the Louisiana House of Representatives and Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan...Holocaust deniers Robert Faurisson and Fredrick Töben...
The conference was widely described as a "Holocaust denial conference" or a "meeting of Holocaust deniers", and provoked worldwide criticism. Out of a total of 33 reports given at the conference, 6 were given by holocaust deniers.
American David Duke, a former Louisiana State Representative and one-time Ku Klux Klan leader, attended the conference. French writer Georges Thiel, who had been convicted under Holocaust denial laws in France, attended, as did Fredrick Töben of Australia who had been imprisoned in Germany for three months in 1999 for Holocaust denial. Robert Faurisson, a convicted Holocaust denier from France also attended, as well as Ahmed Rami, a Swedish-Moroccan Holocaust denier who was imprisoned in Sweden for inciting racial hatred...French Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy was unable to attend the conference for health reasons.
So out of '33 reports given at the conference, 6 were given by holocaust deniers'. And who classified these six 'holocaust deniers', and for what reasons?
Because I'm not interested in getting into a discussion about Neturei Karta (basically they will get in bed with anybody who's against Israel), and because I wanted to make a narrow point about holocaust denial. I wasn't trying to hide anything, just to emphasize my point.
Yosi, would you - along with the Israeli government - like to see Iran wiped off the face of the Earth?
at this stage - it doesn't really matter whether the dude is a holocaust denier ... it's already engrained in the public consciousness ... even today, it was reported that Canada was boycotting his speech to the general assembly and it was reiterated YET again that he was a holocaust denier and that iran wants israel to be wiped off the map ...
soo ... similar to many things ... people will believe what they want to hear ... and substance/truth have no bearing ...
Byrnzie, I'll speak for myself. No, I most certainly do not want Iran to be wiped off the face of the earth, just as I do not want to be baited by you.
I would, however, appreciate it if Iran would stop denying the holocaust, stop calling for Israel's destruction, stop funding and arming terrorist organizations, stop repressing it's own people, and stop building nuclear weapons.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
Comments
There's outrage and anger, not hate.
Like I said, it's my opinion. To me it comes off as hatred.
A lop-sided view of the world? Actually, most people on this board agree with the broad consensus of the international community which - based on U.N Resolution 242 which calls for a full and immediate Israeli withdrawal from the territories it occupied in June 1967 - is as follows:
Peaceful Settlement of The Question of Palestine
November 26, 2008, the United Nations General Assembly, as it does every year, voted on a resolution to end the Israel Palestine conflict. The GA/ 10791 (documents A/63/L.35; A/63/L.36) called for a two state settlement on the 1967 borders, East Jerusalem for the Palestinian State (west for Israel), and a “just” resolution to the refugee problem
The draft resolution on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine (document A/63/L.35) was adopted by a recorded vote of 164 in favour to 7 against, with 3 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
Against: Australia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, United States.
Judging from the above I think it's pretty clear that it's not the pro-Palestinians on this board who have a lop-sided view of the world.
just awesome. :roll: :insert shaking head here:
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
as it is i've seen none.
i love tbose technical terms.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Sure, and I'm happy for you that you can get away with slinging cheap shots all day long while others get banned for such things. Must be nice to be afforded such special status.
Such as?
Edit: And I'm not asking for you to selectively choose some words out of context like you did above. I'd like to see the quotes in full and not from some sabre-rattling Jewish website.
He didn't question whether the holocaust happened. Anyone who reads the passage I pasted here can see that - any honest person that is.
i think what ahmadinejad was saying in the brian williams interview is out of the 60 million people to die in ww2 why do the jews get "special treatment". i think that is more his point than denying the holocost,
The International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust was a two-day conference that opened on December 11, 2006, in Tehran, Iran. The Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, said the conference sought "neither to deny nor prove the Holocaust... [but] to provide an appropriate scientific atmosphere for scholars to offer their opinions in freedom about a historical issue." The 67 attendees from 30 countries included...the American David Duke, former member of the Louisiana House of Representatives and Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan...Holocaust deniers Robert Faurisson and Fredrick Töben...
The conference was widely described as a "Holocaust denial conference" or a "meeting of Holocaust deniers", and provoked worldwide criticism. Out of a total of 33 reports given at the conference, 6 were given by holocaust deniers.
American David Duke, a former Louisiana State Representative and one-time Ku Klux Klan leader, attended the conference. French writer Georges Thiel, who had been convicted under Holocaust denial laws in France, attended, as did Fredrick Töben of Australia who had been imprisoned in Germany for three months in 1999 for Holocaust denial. Robert Faurisson, a convicted Holocaust denier from France also attended, as well as Ahmed Rami, a Swedish-Moroccan Holocaust denier who was imprisoned in Sweden for inciting racial hatred...French Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy was unable to attend the conference for health reasons.
The same contextual problems arise when comparing Western translations to the translation of the Iranian press. Which translation would be more accurate? The ones marketed to people who have no idea if it’s correct (literally or contextually)…? Could the IRNA publicly misinterpreted/mistranslate Ahmadinejad without it being corrected immediately? I doubt it.
…whether or not you agree with his assertions and opinions….you have to admit that the Western translations changed the context, and downplayed criticism of Israel.
Does Iran's President deny the Holocaust?
What is this assertion based on? In substance it is based on dispatches of 2 days - 2005-12-14 and 2006-02-11.
"The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and the Western states and has denied the Holocaust. Instead of making Israel's attacks against Palestine a subject of discussion 'the Western states devote their energy to the fairy-tale of the massacre against the Jews', Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday in a speech at Zahedan in the south-east of Iran which was broadcasted directly by the news-channel Khabar. That day he stated that if the Western states really believe in the assassination of six million Jews in W.W. II they should put a piece of land in Europe, in the USA, Canada or Alaska at Israel's disposal." – dispatch of the German press agency DPA, 2005-12-14.
The German TV-station n24 spreads the following on 2006-12-14 using the title 'Iran's President calls the Holocaust a myth': "The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and called the Holocaust a 'myth' used as a pretext by the Europeans to found a Jewish state in the center of the Islamic world . 'In the name of the Holocaust they have created a myth and regard it to be worthier than God, religion and the prophets' the Iranian head of state said."
The Iranian press agency IRNA .renders Ahmadinejad on 2005-12-14 as follows: "'If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions.' [...] 'If you have committed the crimes so give a piece of your land somewhere in Europe or America and Canada or Alaska to them to set up their own state there.' [...] Ahmadinejad said some have created a myth on holocaust and hold it even higher than the very belief in religion and prophets [...] The president further said, 'If your civilization consists of aggression, displacing the oppressed nations, suppressing justice-seeking voices and spreading injustice and poverty for the majority of people on the earth, then we say it out loud that we despise your hollow civilization.'"
There again we find the quotation already rendered by n24: "In the name of the Holocaust they created a myth." We can see that this is completely different from what is published by e.g. the DPA - the massacre against the Jews is a fairy-tale. What Ahmadinejad does is not denying the Holocaust. No! It is dealing out criticism against the mendacity of the imperialistic powers who use the Holocaust to muzzle critical voices and to achieve advantages concerning the legitimization of a planned war. This is criticism against the exploitation of the Holocaust.
CNN (2005-12-15) renders as follows: "If you have burned the Jews why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel. Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?"
The Washingtonian ''Middle East Media Research Institute' (MEMRI) renders Ahmadinejad's statements from 2005-12-14 as follows: "...we ask you: if you indeed committed this great crime, why should the oppressed people of Palestine be punished for it? * [...] If you committed a crime, you yourselves should pay for it. Our offer was and remains as follows: If you committed a crime, it is only appropriate that you place a piece of your land at their disposal - a piece of Europe, of America, of Canada, or of Alaska - so they can establish their own state. Rest assured that if you do so, the Iranian people will voice no objection."
The MEMRI-rendering uses the relieving translation 'great crime' and misappropriates the following sentence at the * marked passage: "Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions." This sentence has obviously been left out deliberately because it would intimate why the Israeli state could have forfeited the right to establish itself in Palestine - videlicet because of its aggressive expansionist policy against the people of Palestine, ignoring any law of nations and disobeying all UN-resolutions.
In spite of the variability referring to the rendering of the statements of Iran's President we should nevertheless note down: the reproach of denying the Holocaust cannot be sustained if Ahmadinejad speaks of a great and huge crime that has been done to the Jews.
In another IRNA-dispatch (2005-12-14) .the Arabian author Ghazi Abu Daqa writes about Ahmadinejad: "The Iranian president has nothing against the followers of Judaism [...] Ahmadinejad is against Zionism as well as its expansionist and occupying policy. That is why he managed to declare to the world with courage that there is no place for the Zionist regime in the world civilized community."
It's no wonder that such opinions do not go down particularly well with the ideas of the centers of power in the Western world. But for this reason they are not wrong right away. Dealing out criticism against the aggressive policy of the Western world, to which Israel belongs as well, is not yet anti-Semitism. We should at least to give audience to this kind of criticism - even if it is a problematic field for us.
2006-02-11 Ahmadinejad said according to IRNA: "[...] the real holocaust should be sought in Palestine, where the blood of the oppressed nation is shed every day and Iraq, where the defenceless Muslim people are killed daily. [...] 'Some western governments, in particular the US, approve of the sacrilege on the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), while denial of the >Myth of Holocaust<, based on which the Zionists have been exerting pressure upon other countries for the past 60 years and kill the innocent Palestinians, is considered as a crime' [...]"
The assertion that Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust thus is wrong in more than one aspect. He does not deny the Holocaust, but speaks of denial itself. And he does not speak of denial of the Holocaust, but of denial of the Myth of Holocaust. This is something totally different. All in all he speaks of the exploitation of the Holocaust. The Myth of Holocaust, like it is made a subject of discussion by Ahmadinejad, is a myth that has been built up in conjunction with the Holocaust to - as he says - put pressure onto somebody. We might follow this train of thoughts or we might not. But we cannot equalize his thoughts with denial of the Holocaust.
If Ahmadinejad according to this 2006-02-11 condemns the fact that it is forbidden and treated as a crime to do research into the Myth of Holocaust, as we find it quoted in the MEMRI translation, this acquires a meaning much different from the common and wide-spread one. If the myth related to the Holocaust is commuted to a 'Fairy Tale of the Massacre' - like the DPA did - this can only be understood as a malicious misinterpretation.
By the use of misrepresentation and adulteration it apparently succeeded to constitute the statements of the Iranian President to be part and parcel of the currently fought propaganda battle. It is our responsibility to counter this.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e12790.htm
Why did you edit out the names of Western scholars and Jews who attended?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... _Holocaust
The fancy footwork is not Ahmadinejad's, it is the media's. I find it interesting that you consider asking questions a 'shroud' for denial...he is obviously trying to frame his words carefully...maybe it is in order to hide his true intent...but maybe it is in order to avoid detracting from the questions he is asking? Seems the questions themselves are enough to discredit him in the eyes of some (most).
I don't think focusing on your own opinion, an inference, as opposed to addressing the valid points he makes, constitutes objectivity. The statements are regretful, especially considering the opportunity it affords his critics to avoid the underlying questions he asks. Although...if not for the comments about the holocaust, and the opportunity to villify him, these statements never would have seen the light of day in the West.
So out of '33 reports given at the conference, 6 were given by holocaust deniers'. And who classified these six 'holocaust deniers', and for what reasons?
Yosi, would you - along with the Israeli government - like to see Iran wiped off the face of the Earth?
soo ... similar to many things ... people will believe what they want to hear ... and substance/truth have no bearing ...
I would, however, appreciate it if Iran would stop denying the holocaust, stop calling for Israel's destruction, stop funding and arming terrorist organizations, stop repressing it's own people, and stop building nuclear weapons.
they never started
once again, no one from iran has suggested israel be destroyed, they don't have the means to anyway.
i agree, all states need to stop this. starting with the biggest exporters and participators of terrorism, Israel and the US.
yes Israel needs to do this. oh you were talking about iran right.....ever wonder why they want nukes?
when you give 60 billion in arms to a state near them, don't you think they would want the one piece of military technology that can keep them safe?
the empire's foreign policy is encouraging them to seek nuclear weapons.