Jump to content

Ahmadinejad Calls Israel Racist


Caley Stan

Recommended Posts

Here are the words that caused dozens of diplomats, including Britain's ambassador to the UN, to walk out of the conference hall:

"Following World War Two, they resorted to miltary aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering. They sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in occupied.....Palestine........"

At this point the walkout started. The phrase "totally racist government" seems to be the one that offended the diplomats.

So what do folk think? Is`there anything in that statement that offends you?

My opinion is that Ahmadinejad was articulating exactly how many people around the world (especially his part of the world) feel about the existence of Israel. By refusing to listen to that point of view, western diplomats make a mockery of their commitment to multilateralism, the UN and freedom of speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. The British diplomats who walked out should all lose their jobs IMHO. They're supposed to represent us, the british people (a majority of whom would probably agree with ajmadinejad, and at the very least would support his right to express his opinion) not the pro-israel lobby. No wonder so much of the world hates us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do folk think? Is`there anything in that statement that offends you?

Yeah, this:

under the pretext of Jewish suffering

It's that old Holocaust denier again. In doing so, he also denies not only Jewish suffering but also that of Arabs, Russians, the disabled, homosexuals, trade unionists etc etc.

Was the resurrection of Israel the right decision? Nope (in hindsight).

Having Ahmadinejad speak out against racism is a bit like Rosemary West campaigning against drug pushers. Their own inhumanity to their fellow people precludes them from being part of the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel is a terrorist state supported and funded by the US and UK governments.

Still.... at least our very own Tony Blair is a middle east peace envoy... if we can't trust him to sort them all out, who can we trust?

When it comes to kicking US asses Tony's just the very man for the job...

:rotflmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of your views on Israel or indeed Iran, the simple fact is that the only world leader in attendance at this conference - an anti-racism conference - is a self-confessed holocaust denier who once called for Israel to be "wiped off the map". Its also kind of ironic that today is the 120th anniversary of the birth of Hitler and the day before Yom Hashoah (Holocaust Remembrance day).

During this conference he appears to have been the figurehead of a move to repeatedly try and get the UN to equate the word Zionism with Racism. I am sorry, but this is not how diplomacy works and this attempt to railroad through a definition of Zionism is why the last UN conference on racism in Durban in 2001 also ended in chaos !!!

I am no great sympathiser of Israel, or indeed of any other nation in that region. The whole issue is extremely complicated and far beyond my understanding and all sides have blood on their hands from the years of conflict.

To say that all Israelis are racists, or that Zionism is racist is also a bit hypocritical given that the Muslim world quite rightly tells us not to tar all Muslims or the religion of Islam with the brush of terrorism. I do not believe all Muslims are terrorists any more than I believe all Israelis are racists. Pot / Kettle and all that.

Many North and Central American leaders chose not to go to this conference (including Canada and the USA), and went to the Conference of the Americas in Jamaica instead. They had predicted that he would use this conference to take a pot-shot at Israel and were sadly proved right.

I think the Secretary General of the UN got it about right ... he is annoyed with them all !!!

from BBC: - UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has expressed dismay at the boycotts, and the speech, saying Mr Ahmadinejad had used his speech "to accuse, divide and even incite".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The nations who sent representatives to the assembly recognised Ahmadinajad?s right to speak on these issues. Therefore, any protest should have been based on the content of the speech made before them. But they couldn?t wait for Ahmadinajad to start spouting off about the Holocaust ? they had made the decision to walk out before they entered the hall and ended up looking rather stupid because at that point Ahamadinajad hadn?t said anything particularly inflammatory. It?s been amusing to listen to these diplomats trying to explain exactly what it was that offended them so much ? they don?t know because they probably weren?t even listening, just waiting for the call to walk.

I?m not trying to defend Ahamadinajad here. He?s clearly a bit of header but so are the Presidents of Italy and France and we?re still happy to sit and listen to whatever nonsense they spout without making some kind of protest.

Because he's a bit of a loose canon, there's a tendency in the west to try and make a fuss every time he opens his mouth. He's an easy target, conveniently fitting the bill of a crazed 'Dr Evil' who wants destroy the world. The "wipe Israel of the map" line has been pushed very heavily by the British and American governments as we try to cast him in this role. The fact that he didn't actually say it doesn't seem to matter to our politicians as they pursue enemies that look the part on the telly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't call for Israel to be wiped off the map at all...

There are far worse extremists / warmongers in the Israeli and American governments.

Don't believe any of the propaganda. Ahmadinejad isn't a threat to us at all, he's a media hyped 'bogey man' for us to focus our attention on. Our real enemies are far closer to home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont put much faith in what I read on Wikipedia most of the time, but this article does seem to be quite well researched with some fairly credible sources and suggests that the literal translation was closer to "The regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmad...onism.22_speech

However, most reports I have read online say that the delegations walked out after this line of his speech:

"...Following World War Two they resorted to military aggressions to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering, and they sent migrants from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in the occupied Palestine..."

Reuters seems to have a somewhat more balanced reporting of the conference than some: http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/i...J34980320090420

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ahmadinejad is a threat to us all the way he rants on, but...

What he says when he goes on about the establishment of Isreal just don't make any sense. What's the point of war if you can't keep what you take off the other bloke ? isn't that what war has been about for the last 10,000 years ?

Does anyone think that if Iran had beat Iraq 30 years ago that they'd have handed the land and the oilfields back ?

Sure enough war is a condemnation on all of us, we should be able to sort things out without having to resort to slaughtering millions of each other, but until we find a better way then when you win you take the other blokes stuff, how can anyone claim offence at that. I note that Ahmadinejad's proposed answer to the problem is to wipe out Isreal, if he managed to do that would it give him the right to say who inherits the land ?

Edited by Canada Bob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ahmadinejad is a threat to us all the way he rants on, but...

What he says when he goes on about the establishment of Isreal just don't make any sense. What's the point of war if you can't keep what you take off the other bloke ? isn't that what war has been about for the last 10,000 years ?

Why then are Germany and Japan two of the strongest economies in the world?

Does anyone think that if Iran had beat Iraq 30 years ago that they'd have handed the land and the oilfields back ?

Let me refresh your memory here Bob. Iran was not the agressor, Iraq was and they were backed to the hilt by the US and the UK who had been benefitting handsomely from Persian oil. The Shah had signed contracts with western countries for the exploration and production of their oilfields but when he was overthrown the Iranians reneged on the deal. The western leaders armed Iraq and then turned a blind eye when Saddam used (western developed and produced) chemical weapons on the Iranians (and Kurds for that matter but that's a seperate issue). They had no aspirations to extend their borders but were defending their home.

Sure enough war is a condemnation on all of us, we should be able to sort things out without having to resort to slaughtering millions of each other, but until we find a better way then when you win you take the other blokes stuff, how can anyone claim offence at that.

:rotflmao:

I note that Ahmadinejad's proposed answer to the problem is to wipe out Isreal, if he managed to do that would it give him the right to say who inherits the land ?

I propose that there are many translations of Ahmadinejad's speaches and that some are not as he intended. Just as some things are lost in translation others can be found.

Personally I don't believe that he is a threat to anyone, he is all too aware that if he were to attack Israel that his country would soon be turned to glass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy