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.

 

Ahmadinejad says Israel will soon disappear

page: 12
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   
people that compare President Bush to the likes of Saddam Hussein certainly have a screw loose, and apparently get all of their misinformation from rhetoric and nothing more. Pretty sad.

aside from that, back to the subject- Ahmadinejad said plenty about Israel in plain ENGLISH when he was in the US.




posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Ali Khamenei works for Germany.

Iran is controlled by the West since the 20th century, 21th century Terrorism are crimes committed against Islam. Modern anti-semitism originates from Germany, Intergalactic Federation are gathering evidence against the N.W.O. & Shadow government. Foundation of the C.I.A. is the main puzzle piece, Central Intelligence agency is not really an American agency but merely a power extension of the Bush family. Military Intelligence needs to come from the U.S. Department of Defense and not the C.I.A., it doesn't say anywhere in the U.S. Constitution that power is vested with the Central Intelligence Agency and it shouldn't. America is supposed to be a free country not a fascist country, people who disagree with this don't belong in America.

Here are some words rarely heard of but which are relivant to the war on terror.

War on Terror:
Discrimination of Social Exclusion, Combating poverty, Scientific & technological advance over the enemy. This is exaclty what is happening in Iraq & Afghanistan, but these are actually quotes from the European constitution.

So who is the U.S. military to follow the E.U. constitution?

Next thing you know, Europeans blame it on America. But the U.S. constitution would not do such a thing, so these are all lies, money & false premises to go to war.

Become a better person and show some respect.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Israel and IRAN as usual ranting against each other ..



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ragnarok691
This wackjob will start a war if he isn't overthrown first. There is alot of unrest in Iran over this guy. He killed and threatened his way into office and that kind of leader does not always last long. He is ordering his army, navy and air forces to provoke american forces. If you watch these videos such as the boats released by the DOD and simply put 2 and 2 together, he wants us to start the war. If we take the first shot then he can lob his missiles at isreal and the forces in Iraq. Sure we can bomb back but any land invasion would be next to impossible.


you hit the nail right on the head... thats the other alternatives that president bush was referring too... the people of iran who aren't the bad ones here, need to overthrow the bastard...from what i understand the people of iran have accepted and enjoy a western style of living lately and like it, but this nutball wants everything the way it was back during the days of babylon or persia...



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Excuse me if this has been answered already - I got bored of reading the usual back and forth after Page 5...

I notice Ahmadinejad said "...[Israel] is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene"

Now, is this just a bad translation? Because "erased from the geographical scene" is a whole different ball game to "erased from the pages of time" or whatever else he may have said in the past. This quite clearly means moved or destroyed to me.

If any other world leader said that another country would be erased geographically, wouldn't that set alarm bells ringing?
Or is this OK because Ahmadinejad is just constantly misunderstood and misquoted?



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiracy Realist
 

I don't disagree with your comments about my statement. In our bubble, what you're saying would seem rational and certainly humane, but these things are about to fly right out the window, I'm afraid.

But you might not be taking into consideration a number of things.
Saddam had the 4th largest military on the planet at the time of the first gulf war. Iraq and Iran had been torturing each other for years and had seasoned armies. The Soviets were largely responsible for modernization, if you'll call it that, of the ME. Both Iran and Iraq had horrible weapons systems. Nerve gas and big guns, etc.
I saw a piece of film footage of the Iranians marching mobs of little kids with AK's at gun point to attack Iraqi positions. They were mowed down in heaps. But they kept sticking young children out front. (CBS news '82 or '83)
The amount of human sufferring was ongoing and ubiquitous.
I can't even go into all of it, but there's no comparison.
I saw lots of pro-Bush and anti-Bush propaganda in the last election. We can ridicule him to our heart's content. Never that way with Saddam. He was a dictator.

You should study the Iran-Iraq War. It really reveals where these people are and where they've been.

I HAD high hopes for Iran, but they have their own Bush-like elements and my hope fades.
The types of "torture" in Cuba are nothing compared to the Baathist methods.

The comparison between Bush and Saddam isn't fair. Certainly Bush is responsible in many ways for many deaths, but every soldier is. Yes, there shouldn't be armies, but there are.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curio
Excuse me if this has been answered already - I got bored of reading the usual back and forth after Page 5...

I notice Ahmadinejad said "...[Israel] is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene"

Now, is this just a bad translation? Because "erased from the geographical scene" is a whole different ball game to "erased from the pages of time" or whatever else he may have said in the past. This quite clearly means moved or destroyed to me.

If any other world leader said that another country would be erased geographically, wouldn't that set alarm bells ringing?
Or is this OK because Ahmadinejad is just constantly misunderstood and misquoted?


No no no . . . you have it all wrong! He meant regime. By erased he meant that he would like to move them. And by geography, he meant down the street in a new neighborhood.

So Mr. Ahmadinejad wants to move the regime to a better neighborhood down the street.

Right guys?




posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   


Saddam had the 4th largest military on the planet at the time of the first gulf war. Iraq and Iran had been torturing each other for years and had seasoned armies. The Soviets were largely responsible for modernization, if you'll call it that, of the ME. Both Iran and Iraq had horrible weapons systems. Nerve gas and big guns, etc.


lol, it was army using mainly outdated T-62 and T-55 , with a few T-72 'Urals' , whose production in USSR had halted in 1978
the ammo they used for tanks was outdated BM-16/17/18 steel penetrator rounds

they had no military recon capabilities , unlike USSR and USA ,
and there Scuds , were not of Scud-D modification(which has Glonass package and has CEP of 40 meters and was used by soviets in 80's)

they had scud-a which were highly inaccurate , with CEP of 4 km , old mig-21/23 crafts , a few handful mig-29 , so like how was iraq a match for any of the superpowers


[edit on 4-6-2008 by manson_322]



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Spock Shock
 


Right! And the striking resemblence between Spock and Ahmadinejad is rather shocking. It is true Israel shall soon dissappear! The best news in a long time. Imagine that. All these problems with the middle east just up and vanish. You won't ever hear of it again. No more worries about terrorism, threats from surrounding countries, no more dissappearing money, no more inflated oil prices, no more troops dying, etc, etc. Peace on Earth. And better yet President Bush will also be a thing of the past. How awesome is that? No more Bush!!!!

Now don't tell me your not for that.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by djerwulfe
reply to post by Conspiracy Realist
 

I don't disagree with your comments about my statement. In our bubble, what you're saying would seem rational and certainly humane, but these things are about to fly right out the window, I'm afraid.

But you might not be taking into consideration a number of things.
Saddam had the 4th largest military on the planet at the time of the first gulf war. Iraq and Iran had been torturing each other for years and had seasoned armies. The Soviets were largely responsible for modernization, if you'll call it that, of the ME. Both Iran and Iraq had horrible weapons systems. Nerve gas and big guns, etc.
I saw a piece of film footage of the Iranians marching mobs of little kids with AK's at gun point to attack Iraqi positions. They were mowed down in heaps. But they kept sticking young children out front. (CBS news '82 or '83)
The amount of human sufferring was ongoing and ubiquitous.
I can't even go into all of it, but there's no comparison.
I saw lots of pro-Bush and anti-Bush propaganda in the last election. We can ridicule him to our heart's content. Never that way with Saddam. He was a dictator.


Of all that said, the U.S is the one who put Saddaam in power knowing his background. They had a relationship with Saddaam in fact Rumsfeld met Saddam in 1984 with instructions to improve relations, despite chemical weapons use and sanctuary for terrorists. They had all this information yet continued there support.

Also there are numerous accounts from senior Government officials that claim that Regan Administration covertly provided "critical battle planning assistance at a time when American intelligence knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the decisive battles of the Iran-Iraq war."

"On August 18, 2002, the New York Times carried a front-page story headlined, "Officers say U.S. aided Iraq despite the use of gas". Quoting anonymous US "senior military officers", the NYT "revealed" that in the 1980s, the administration of US President Ronald Reagan covertly provided "critical battle planning assistance at a time when American intelligence knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the decisive battles of the Iran-Iraq war". The story made a brief splash in the international media, then died."

"not only did Ronald Reagan's Washington turn a blind-eye to the Hussein regime's repeated use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and Iraq's Kurdish minority, but the US helped Iraq develop its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs."


You should study the Iran-Iraq War. It really reveals where these people are and where they've been.

I HAD high hopes for Iran, but they have their own Bush-like elements and my hope fades.
The types of "torture" in Cuba are nothing compared to the Baathist methods.

The comparison between Bush and Saddam isn't fair. Certainly Bush is responsible in many ways for many deaths, but every soldier is. Yes, there shouldn't be armies, but there are.


The types of torture you proclaim are no comparison to that of the America's torture of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay doesnt take away the fact that America is still TORTURING prisoners without a fair trial. Whether or not the torture methods are different, they are still forms of TORTURE.

Most people would dispute the claim that Bush and Saddam are no comparison. Saddam was a dictator indeed but Bush him self has passed so many laws which are so similiar to those of that Hitler passed down.

Hitler introduced the Enabling Act and Bush introduced the Patriot Act

Hitler spyed on its citizens and Bush has introduced laws to do the same.

Hitler inflicted dictatorship powers and Bush introduced the Homeland Security Presidential Directive.

Peace

CR



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pleiadian-dan
reply to post by RiotComing
 

to the OP AND OTHERS,
although your fears or views about the isreal iran situation (prpogated by the u.s) are understandable and right, we must remember that many if not all quates and speeches from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have been seriously mis quated and the publics misled for example the wiping of isreal off the map was actually a mis quote disseminated in the media his actual words where direxted at the regime, so any quote regarding the iranian president should throughly reserched and sourced as we all no the western media monopoly has a strangled hold and propagates war with iran, isreal is the place of evil and unrest genocide of th palastines. this is the country and regime we should be toppling in this bogus war on terror not iran.
the war on terror should be directed at americe the puppeters of a faxe global war and biggest terrorist on our earth,
many thnks
Pleiadian-dan


Exactly!

I wrote about a couple of pages back where it went un-noticed.

Here it is again.

All across the world, a dangerous rumor had spread that could have catastrophic implications - World War III. According to the corrupt world of the media, Iran's President has threatened to destroy Israel on more than one occassion or, to quote the misquote, "Israel must be wiped off the map". We all remember that statement as it was played day in and day out. Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made, as the following will prove.

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:

Word by word translation:

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

Khomeini was a Iranian Leader in the 1970's for the Iranian Revolution.

We are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".

The mistranslated "wiped off the map" quote attributed to Iran's President has been spread worldwide, repeated thousands of times in international media, and prompted the denouncements of numerous world leaders. Virtually every major and minor media outlet has published or broadcast this false statement to the masses. Big news agencies such as The Associated Press and Reuters refer to the misquote, literally, on an almost daily basis to further push the governments agenda of going into war with Iran.

Following news of Iran's remark, as usual condemnation was swift and not surprising at all.

This scenario mirrors the kind of false claims that led to the illegal US invasion of Iraq, a war now widely viewed as a catastrophic mistake. And yet the Bush administration and the corrupt corporate media continue to marinate the propaganda and speculation about attacking Iraq's much larger and more formidable neighbor - Iran. Most of this rests on the unproven assumption that Iran is building nuclear weapons, and the lie that Iran has vowed to physically destroy Israel which has been proven to be very misleading and not accurate. Given its scope and potentially disastrous outcome, all this amounts to what is arguably the RUMOUR of the century.

Peace

CR



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by USMC-oorah
You should be grateful it's not you! If there wasn't people to fight wars. War would be fought with people who didn't want to fight them!


And those people tends towards sabotage and disruption when they understand that they are doing horrible things to others without legitimate cause. Armies should always be drafted lest they begin to serve people other than they were drawn from.


It's the world we live in my friend.


And shouldn't we attempt to make it more just for everyone?


Drafts, national service, all the good stuff. Are you not glad that there is someone esle doing it ? I'm no murderer either my friend.


How many acts of sabotage did us personal engage in during the second world war as compared to the fighting in Vietnam? What do you think will happen to the efficiency of the US armed forces if it starts filling up with draftees that does not want to be there and know that they are there for corporate profit? THAT'S why they want standing armies, and will do their best to resist the introduction of 'the draft', and it's why they have to pay out massive sign up bonuses and pay ever higher salaries and benefits to lure poor Americans into the armed forces. The fact that they still can't meet their recruitment needs either speaks volumes as to the fast declining number of men fooled by the propaganda or suggests that Americans don't care to die in defense of their country.

You are obviously free to pick what seems the most accurate of those two options.

Stellar

Stellar



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by darthdescendent
 


I think this line of logic is at least someone what close to the truth.

The Islofacist government in Iran was put in place by the IC's, who engineered the U.S. hostage takeover and the rise of Khomeini, putting Reagan and Bush I into power, and the current rise to power of the IC's. At the end the seventies the super rich in the U.S. were at their lowest tide since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Ahmadinejad is only acting at the request of his IC bosses by pounding the drum war. None of the three current candidates for the U.S. president are what the IC's desire, and with the depletion of the worlds oil supplies the IC's are smart enough to see the end of their world domination.

If the people of Iran were to break free from Islamic control, and start living their lives in accordance with their own choosing, it would be the beginning of the un-rattling of Islam. Given their free choice, people would not follow the strict requirements of Islam, and choose to live a western style of life. Islam is the big hope of the IC's to return to a catholic style, medieval, aristocratic controlled world.

When you are talking about the bad things the U.S. has done, you are talking about the bad things the IC's have done, working through the U.S. government. Most of these third world dictatorships work for the IC's, making the world a very dangerous place for decent people everywhere.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Realist

Exactly!

I wrote about a couple of pages back where it went un-noticed.

Here it is again.


So, as I asked above, was he misinterpreted when he said recently said that Israel would soon be "erased geographically"?

You can blame it all on propaganda, but Ahmadinajad knows very well (as do most of us) that what he says is a veiled threat. No matter how you dress it up, the guy is still basically talking about his desire to see a race of people removed...."geographically"....."from the pages of time"....whatever, I'm sure we all have the brains to read between the lines


Can we please stop defending this maniac? It amazes me how Bush & Co are pure evil and you can't trust a word they say (which is absolutely true) but Ahmadinajad? Oh, the poor boy is just misunderstood and misquoted. Give me a break



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Curio
... but Ahmadinajad? Oh, the poor boy is just misunderstood and misquoted. Give me a break


i totally agree... how does anyone justify standing up for a person who is need of some serious head work done.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Curio

Originally posted by Conspiracy Realist

Exactly!

I wrote about a couple of pages back where it went un-noticed.

Here it is again.


So, as I asked above, was he misinterpreted when he said recently said that Israel would soon be "erased geographically"?

You can blame it all on propaganda, but Ahmadinajad knows very well (as do most of us) that what he says is a veiled threat. No matter how you dress it up, the guy is still basically talking about his desire to see a race of people removed...."geographically"....."from the pages of time"....whatever, I'm sure we all have the brains to read between the lines


Can we please stop defending this maniac? It amazes me how Bush & Co are pure evil and you can't trust a word they say (which is absolutely true) but Ahmadinajad? Oh, the poor boy is just misunderstood and misquoted. Give me a break


As i have stated in several pages back i requested a video of the Iran President speaking in reference to Israel being "geographically erased" re this topic so i can translate it.

I made a point of Ahmadinajad's speech about Israel being "wiped off the map" as a tool to help people learn that the media does manipulate and propagate certain topics to gain strength from both the American people and the world, in this instance Iran and the Iranian Presidents speech.

It was proven without shadow of doubt that the media's reporting on the "wiped off the map" speech was utter manipulation and very much misquoted as i have proven and so have others around the world. Should you therefore be wary of what the media reports about Iran? Id say yes. That is the normal stance to take.

He wasnt making that statement as HIS OWN STATEMENT. He was quoting what the Iranian Revolution leader Khomeni said back in the 1970's. But the media reported this as his own and propagated it emensely.

I could name alot of speeches that President Bush has made that have turned out to be nothing but utter lies.

This most important one that comes to me as surprizing is the speech he made after the events 9/11.

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01


"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01,


"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02


Your right and im glad you made that point that Bush cannot be trusted and that the things he spews out are lies. So how can you trust the current Administrations claims of Iran harboring or making Nuclear Weapons? What evidence is there to prove such a claim? Dont waste your time ill answer that for you.... NIL!

Maybe the new secretary of defense may say what Rumsfield said about Iraq and the where abouts of its Nuclear Weapons.

"We know where they [WMD] are. They're in the area around Tehran and other places and east, west, south and north somewhat."

Peace

CR



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Unless his quote of the Ayatollah was followed by a reversal of that stance, it is as good as Ahmadegad saying that Israel should be eliminated. How hard is that to grasp, or how foolish do you think we are?



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

Unless his quote of the Ayatollah was followed by a reversal of that stance, it is as good as Ahmadegad saying that Israel should be eliminated. How hard is that to grasp, or how foolish do you think we are?


The point is the media manipulated and misquoted his speech as a form of propaganda, they used his speech and misquoted him day in day out obviously due to the media complacency there was a strong backlash over the misquoted speech - ""Israel must be wiped off the map". He never mentioned the words wiped off or map.

Let me explain to you further Ahmadinejad made his speech in an annual anti Zionist conference where Ahmadinejad was being prophetic NOT threatening. He was citing the late Imam Khomeini who was a former Iranian Leader for the Iranian revolution, which Imam said this line in the 80s, a period when Israel was selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as so ghastly then...hmm. Ahmadinejad had just reminded his audience that the Shah's regime, the USSR or Soviet Union, and the Saddam regime had all seemed enormously powerful and immovable yet the first two had VANISHED almost beyond recall and the third now languished in prison. So too the occupying regime in Jerusalem would someday be gone. His message was in essence "This too shall pass."

The Iranian president Ahmadinejad was only expressing a vague wish for the future. In no means was he threatening an Iranian initiated war to remove Israeli control over Jerusalem.

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 Ahmadinejad is talking about regime change, not the end of Israel. As a schoolboy opponent of the Shah in the mid 70's he surely did not favour Iran's removal from the "page of time". He only wanted the Shah out.

The same with regard to Israel, Ahmadinejad is undeniably an opponent of Zionism, 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.

Peace

CR


[edit on 5-6-2008 by Conspiracy Realist]



posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiracy Realist
 


And then you get People like Dave420 who go and try to fuel propaganda by bringing absolute crap like this to what is normally a good forum..

Do us a Favor... Quit crying to us "Goyim" about you self prescribed issues...

P.S. Keep your racism to your self ass hole..

GFYS Dave420 you Fail.



posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Ok, I agree, you've got a point. If that is the circumstance, then Ahmadinejad, who needs a shorter name, isn't calling for action, but hoping Israel follows the former USSR and Husain into history. He isn't actually calling for the destruction of Israel, but wishing that it would happen.

I doubt if the current Muslim world would be happy with any government in Israel that is not controlled by Muslims. This is the crux of the problem. Still, I think the NAZI supporting Bush clan would like to see the Muslim religion replace the Catholic religion as the basis for a NWO ruled by royal elites. I think GW, Osama, and Ahmadinejad are all in one big circle with numerous other evil world domination types. They are all working together to start wars and keep the sheople scared.

What would they do if the new government in Iraq were actually to coalesce and bloom into a functioning democracy controlled by moderate Muslims who give rights to women and start endorsing honest religious freedom.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join