It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israeli President Calls on World to Unite Against Iran

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Israeli President Calls on World to Unite Against Iran


www.breitbart.com

Israeli President Shimon Peres called on the world in an interview Tuesday to form a united front against Iran that would force the Islamic republic to end its pursuit of nuclear weapons.
"Iran only has power when the world is divided," Peres told France's Le Figaro daily, referring to the stalemate over Iran's nuclear programme.

"If Iran is confronted by a united front, it will change" its policy on the nuclear issue, the veteran statesman added.
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 24-7-2007 by the_sentinal]




posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Another log thrown on the fire burning against Iran, Peres has noted four other countries that have given up nuclear ambitions under pressure from the international community, Ukraine, Libya, South Africa and North Korea. perhaps he's right??

www.breitbart.com
(visit the link for the full news article)





[edit on 24-7-2007 by the_sentinal]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 06:18 AM
link   
Over all I don't think this will make much of a difference. I don't think that many countries in the world like Israel that much. I know several countries have chosen not to pursue nuke weapons, and some have chosen to dismantle ones they have created. I just don't see Iran giving up the weapons.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Funny thing that this headline should come out on the day that the U.S. and Iran are holding talks, just a coincidence??? I think not.

Talk about adding pressure to both sides. I dont think they will accomplish much anyway.

[edit on 24-7-2007 by the_sentinal]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Why the west but specially USA want Iran to stop hi’s nuclear program


The main economic advantages of oil exports via Iran are based on its geographical proximity, its growing internal petroleum product demand and the presence of an extensive network of crude oil, gas and petroleum product pipelines. Geographically, Iran is unique in the region. In the North and West Iran shares boarder with Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Nakhichevan and Turkey. The country's oil and gas pipeline network is within 200km of all the above-mentioned countries. The demand for the petroleum products are in the northern half of the country which has a population of nearly 50 million people and is generally cold in winter time.
Tabriz and Tehran refineries are the most logical outlets for crude oil from Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. The idea of "oil swap" is based on using crude oil from these countries to supply the above-mentioned refineries in exchange for the crude oil exportation from the Persian Gulf. This "swap arrangement" would be the quickest and the cheapest solution to the problem of exporting some of the oil produced in the region. Swap arrangement with Iran would give the maximum security to the producers and the operating companies as the deal would be based on the direct purchase of oil at Caspian ports and does not involve pipeline transit through other countries. The fact that Iran will purchase the oil and use it in its own refineries and the products would be consumed domestically confirms Iran as the most secure outlet for Caspian oil as it would have a vested interest in the continuation of such swap arrangements.
www.payvand.com...

Now you can see that Iran is very important not only because of oil but also geographically.
Now Iran knows that, and the hardliner in the government want to take all necessary step to secure they country from USA or any other Western allied if they want to make any regime changes in they country like British and U.S. governments did in the late 50’s when they removed Mohamed Mosadek who wanted Iran free energy management from foreign intervention.
Now today we all know that if one country that hold nuclear weapon strike any other country, then must probably the consequences will be that this country will be eradicated from the “Google earth” .
So you have it there…like the war in Iraq it is all about who control energy. We all know that Exon and BP control the war in Iraq.
As for Israel, I wander where all the politician where when Pakistan was working hard with many western country on getting the bomb, and has you can see from the latest news it seem that the fundamentalist Muslim are more out of control in Pakistan then in Iran.
So now we can say that nuclear in the issue of Iran is a smoke screen.

``````````````````````````
Found link and added 'ex' tags

Please read Posting work written by others

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You have a U2U





[edit on 24/7/07 by masqua]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   
exactly sentanil.
I tells ya, I reacon this upcoming meeting will end with matters unresolved, and tempers fraying.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:26 AM
link   
I notice that he hasn't called for another middle eastern country to give up its nuclear ambititions and weapons...

Well, he wouldn't want to disarm himself, would he



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
I notice that he hasn't called for another middle eastern country to give up its nuclear ambititions and weapons...

Well, he wouldn't want to disarm himself, would he



I thought the same thing. Rather hypocritical of him to take the high road considering what Israel maintains......unofficially.

brill



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by brill

I thought the same thing. Rather hypocritical of him to take the high road considering what Israel maintains......unofficially.

brill


Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that Israel has not called for "the anihilation of Iran"...or any other Arab nation...

When are people going to understand the difference? Israel is not coming up every week on the news with it's president claiming "the end is near for Iran", or "the Israeli people of the world are going to burn Iran to the ground", or anything similar....

Wake up and smell the roses...this world is neither a peaceful place to live nor is it an utopia...

[edit on 24-7-2007 by Muaddib]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:48 AM
link   
It's amazing when the Iranian president got mis-quoted saying he wanted to blow Israel of the map there was much anger from everyone, the media went crazy over it and wanted blood. The same thing has just been basically said by the Israeli's and nothing has been said in the media, don't you love how biased we all are



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that Israel has not called for "the anihilation of Iran"...or any other Arab nation...


Muaddib is completely right.

Iran has called for Israel to wiped off the map and has made many references to Israel being "removed".

The key here is supporting the democratic people of Iran who want to get rid of this regime that is damaging the economy of Iranian Republic.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by estar
It's amazing when the Iranian president got mis-quoted saying he wanted to blow Israel of the map there was much anger from everyone, the media went crazy over it and wanted blood. The same thing has just been basically said by the Israeli's and nothing has been said in the media, don't you love how biased we all are

When has Israel said that?

The Israelis are about self defense while the Arabs (their leaders anyhow) are about genocide.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:58 AM
link   
There below you can read what the president of Iran has actually said.

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

never talked about any wiped off Israel…but again some clever people could say different.

Is only one enemy, is the one you don’t know about.

kacou



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
Iran has called for Israel to wiped off the map and has made many references to Israel being "removed".


No, it hasn't. Your understanding of the words "Israel" and "Zionism" may be different from mine and Ahmadinejads, and "map" and "page of time", but you and others are not fooling anyone.


Originally posted by infinite
The key here is supporting the democratic people of Iran who want to get rid of this regime that is damaging the economy of Iranian Republic.


The economy.. is that your only justification, besides the claim of a nuclear weapons program? What gives you ANY right to decide whats best for the people of another country, a country where you do not even reside in!

After the Iraq claim of WMD, ANYONE who buys the "Iran has WMD" line is either just completely stupid and ignorant to some basic facts, or is giving their backing to the Zionists.

No one falls for the same mistake twice, which brings into question those like yourself who so boldly state "Iran has called for Israel to wiped off the map and has made many references to Israel being removed"..

Grow up.

[edit on 24-7-2007 by shrunkensimon]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:07 AM
link   
so,
I am to believe a conspiracy site for the true meaning of the statement? Plus, the site refers to Israel as the "Zionist state"....not bias then?



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by estar
It's amazing when the Iranian president got mis-quoted saying he wanted to blow Israel of the map there was much anger from everyone, the media went crazy over it and wanted blood. The same thing has just been basically said by the Israeli's and nothing has been said in the media, don't you love how biased we all are


Well, the only problem is although some people do claim that he was misquoted the fact of the matter is that his hate speech was even in Iranian newspapers, and even Khatami(?) reprimanded the Iranian president for using such words.

I have quoted in the past from Iranian newspapers and other Arab newspapers and the "apologists" are wrong....

The name of that speech/meeting he did was itself called "a world without Zionism", and I have quoted the Iranian president saying clearly in an interview to the German newspaper Spiegel that he considers all Israelis as Zionists...


President Khatami's Chief of Staff Criticizes Ahmadinejad for his Comments
An anonymous commentator, on my blog, has left a comment or two saying that her/his investigation on the translation of Ahmadinejad's speech shows that Ahmadinejad never meant any harmful intentions towards Israelis.

I insisted, and still insist, that my reading of the Persian texts of Ahmadinejad's speech proved to me that Ahmadinejad did aggregate "the Regime Occupying the Qods/Palestine" with "Israel", as a nation with its mostly Jewish Zionist population. I contended that a majority of Jews in Israel settled or re-settled there for the purpose of creating a solely Jewish state, for and run by the Jews, and Ahmadinejad's call for a World without Zionism meant that those people are equally in danger as much as Israel as a regime is. Now, I am here to corroborate my claim further by the following from the weblog of Mr. Abtahi, the former Chief of Staff of President Khatami.

Mr. Abtahi, a Shiite Clergy himself, is a very candid person, and has written about Ahmadinejad's speech. He is known to have a balanced approach, and of course this balanced approach has not been always liked by the hardliners. From Abtahi's comments I conclude that my reading of Ahmadinejad's speech in Persian was correct that he did mean the destruction of Israel as a nation-state, and not just as a system.

In both of his comments on Ahmadinejad's speech about the World without Zionism, Abtahi too believes that Ahmadinejad has radically called for the destruction of "the Israel Nation-State". Abtahi explicitly mentions that Ahmadinejad demanded the destruction of "Israel" (not just the regime occupying the Qods, after all that regime is made up of people who believe in that regime and Abtahi too knows that).

..................
He mentions that the radicalism of the President became even clearer when he encouraged the participants of the speech to shout "Death to Israel" much louder, as he could not hear their initial "death to Israel" shouting loud enough! (from Persian, webnevesht, Mr. Abtahi's weblog). For a translation of this post in English, please look at the English section of his weblog, here.

secularcaniranik.blogs.com...



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Anyways, it is a bit early and it will take me a while to search the forums for the old links i have given, but the following excerpt from Wikipedia corroborates my statement about Khatami reprimanding the Iranian president for calling for the destruction of Israel....


Former president Khatami stated "those words have created hundreds of political and economic problems for us in the world." [48] Khatami has also recently accused Ahmadinejad and his supporters of being an Iranian "Taliban" and giving the enemies of Iran "... the best excuse to attack Islam and Iran." [49] Others in Iran have said that there is nothing new about his statements and that the West has overreacted in order to try to smear Iran's international image.[50]

At a later news conference on January 14, 2006, Ahmadinejad stated his speech had been exaggerated and misinterpreted.[51] "There is no new policy, they created a lot of hue and cry over that. It is clear what we say: Let the Palestinians participate in free elections and they will say what they want."

In 2005 Khamenei responded to President Ahmadinejad's alleged remark that Israel should be "wiped of the map" by saying that "the Islamic Republic has never threatened and will never threaten any country."[52] Moreover Khamenei`s main advisor in foreign policy, Ali Akbar Velayati, refused to take part in Holocaust conference. In contrast to Ahmadinejad`s remarks, Velayati said that Holocaust was a genocide and a historical reality. [53]

en.wikipedia.org...


Are the "apologists" now also going to claim that Khatami and other Iranians "misquoted the Iranian president and they don't understand Persian"?....

---edited to add more excerpts---

[edit on 24-7-2007 by Muaddib]



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   
*Yawns*

Yeah, I've been here for four years at ATS, but I'll bite at this one...

(I should know better)


Originally posted by shrunkensimon
What gives you ANY right to decide whats best for the people of another country, a country where you do not even reside in!


I don't recall me deciding anything. I said supporting the democratic people. Are you against democracy or something?



may be different from mine and Ahmadinejads


Is he your best friend?



or is giving their backing to the Zionists.


Define Zionism..

and i like the way you say "the zionist"...stereotyping isn't a good thing btw.



Grow up.


I'm 21 thank you


p.s i enjoy debating with members, but please act mature



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:22 AM
link   
The problem the world knows its a double standard, to ask iran to give up on its nuclear ambitions. This is where his wants fall down, people know that if israel can have them, why cannot iran. Just because they are the socalled enemy we all have to go along with israel, which is something that the world will not go along with.

Its just a double standard, will israel give up there weapons, without a doubt not.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that Israel has not called for "the anihilation of Iran"...or any other Arab nation...

When are people going to understand the difference? Israel is not coming up every week on the news with it's president claiming "the end is near for Iran", or "the Israeli people of the world are going to burn Iran to the ground", or anything similar....

Wake up and smell the roses...this world is neither a peaceful place to live nor is it an utopia...

[edit on 24-7-2007 by Muaddib]


Indeed, how are those rose colored glasses fitting anyways
This topic has come up time and time again, quoted factually to mis-quoted neither of us will get a clear answer here. However Israel has nukes that is a fact. If entitlement suites them I see no difference for others. I'm not talking about tin pot 3rd world dictatorships having the button but if dangerous regions like India & Pakistan are armed so to then can other nations in the name of self defense.

brill



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join