Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

When Did Iran Say It Wanted To Kill All Jews?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 



As I've stated, it's dictionary.com. Hell, even Wikipedia agrees with me. Whatever it is you're trying to prove, it won't work.


Oh i guess because they say it then it must be true! The internet is always right!

I'd believe someone that can read and translate arabic over and above any other source. Would you agree that this is the best source for translations and meanings?


You really want to go down that road? You do realize that the first five books of the Old Testament (known as the Torah) is Jewish Law? This does not mean that it does not apply to us (Christians), but we cannot fulfill the law. The whole point of the OT was to show how Mankind fails.


I would say its more God's failing than mankind's, but i've been down this road with many Christians before. If you do not follow of believe the 1st part of the book and focus solely on the new testament, then perhaps you should turn the other cheek, love thy neighbour and understand that we are all human. Just because of a few verses in a book it doesn't mean Muslims are hell bent on killing everyone of a different religion.

Perhaps approach it with love, peace and understanding rather than making out "So, they want to kill everyone" and that followers of Islam are not peaceful or loving.

So no, Iran doesn't want to kill all Jews. They never said that, they don't think that and if they did all the Jews in Iran would be dead and gone already. It's twisted lies, nothing else.
edit on 4-4-2012 by Nammu because: spelling




posted on Apr, 4 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Ahmedinejad has never said that he would perpetrate a holocaust against Jews. Obviously, saying such a thing is not much of a useful strategy for someone who works on improving his relations with foreign governments which cannot afford to appease an anti-Semite. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, however, has been repeatedly quoting the Ayatollah's statement that Israel will be wiped off the pages of history, which does imply war-mongering and ill-intentions towards the Zionist state.

As for the actual treatment of Jews in Iran, there exists a mild persecution, in the form of unwarranted inspections of individual Jews on the suspicion of them being Mossad agents, barring Jews from engaging in politics (with a single exception, a single seat in the Iranian parliament reserved for a representative of the Jewish minority), and making it impermissible for Jews to flee the state, except on a few conditions which involve seizing all of their property. But Iran doesn't plan to behave in a Nazi fashion towards its Jews in the near future; it's enough that they build nuclear facilities to extirpate 6.5 million Jews who reside in Israel off the planet. Those who are condoning such a development are worse than mere anti-Semites; they're enemies of humanity, and whatever calamity they wish that will befall Israel, should ten times befall on them.

Iranian declarations which state that "soon the Zionist entity will cease to exist" are mere saber-rattling and militarist rhetoric: we've seen in the epic debacle called "Global March to Jerusalem" that Iran is incapable of recruiting even a few dozen people to simply cross the open borders of the Israeli desert on their way to Jerusalem. The protesters ended up screaming their bowels up to empty Israeli embassies. Those who did participate were thrill-seeking Palestinian youngsters who've just received their monthly excuse to bully the Israeli police with stones and molotove. For all its worth, Iran has no prospect to defeat Israel.

Now, if I were the Prime Minister of Israel, I would rain a few nuclear bombs (according to foreign media, Israel has hundreds of them) on Tehran and its region, to set a desirable precedent: that those who even dare threatening Israel with nuclear weaponry will face retaliation in kind. But then again, even a swift operation involving no more than 80 jets, if conducted correctly, will suffice.

Israel's internal conflicts, the religious nuisance and the Arab one, are the most pernicious hindrances to Israel's continuation as a viable state. Israel's worst problem is not Iran, but... the Jews. In long-term contemplation, individual prosperous Jews ought to emigrate from Israel to a safer country, like Canada for instance.
edit on 4-4-2012 by RATSOYFY37 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 12:15 AM
link   
I do not believe that this is a matter of religion, race, or the average hardworking people in Israel or Iran, this problem is between their governments wanting to seize more power than the other, gain the upper hand in the region, Israel believes that everything they do is for the protection of their people. In reality they are makeing the situation worse by occupying lands of Palastine which should have been declared independent at the same time as Israel. I can tell you right now what israeli policy is for the west bank, it is to demoralize the palistinians to the point where
A. they opt to become Israeli citizens (Unlikely)

or

B. force the palistinians into exile from thier lands while increasing their own jewish (israeli) population so that Israel may exercise complete sovereignty over the west bank for "National Security"

Think about it, research how the U.S.. came to aquire Hawaii is this not somewhat familiar?

Now back to Iran which had been a U.S. interest before the overthrow of the shah, Iran does have the right to enrich uranium and does adhere to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, is anyone going to put sanctions on the United States for enriching uranium no dont think so and the U.S. has nukes. Iran will not be the first to attack Israe by conventional or nuclear means, they are not stupid as they know that doing so will have 500 nukes dropped on them, but if Israel attacks first the world will look world will look down on Israel just like what happened in the Lebanon War it was unjustified just like attacking nuclear sites in Iran is unjustified. i do not blame the jewish people as a whole but instead the government that has been placed into power by their "best and brightest" do not bring up the whole democratic process argument look at how obama and john mccain campaigned against each other its all about media image and uneducated voters, just as in the U.S., Iran, and every other country.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by RATSOYFY37
 


i am so glad you are not the israeli prime minister.
you have the nerve to state you would reign nuclear death down on more innocents than guilty whilst deploring their research into nuclear energy.
do as we say, not as we do. ring a bell?
i would call you a buttmunchin zionist but i suspect that would be against t and c's
and for the record, i know israeli jews as well as muslims so any spittle from your end regarding hatred towards the israeli people has just had the wind taken out of it's sails.
i also suspect you may be crabby if the shill cheque hasn't turned up yet.

you will however find kindred spirits on here that will be more than happy enough to share your (i suspect) political ideals and destructive urges.

best wishes for your future fakedirt.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   
www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

english.farsnews.com...


www.youtube.com...



edit on 5-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 08:21 AM
link   
How about this?


Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is calling for the death of all Jews and the destruction of Israel. On the Web site, called Alef, Khamenei says the opportunity must not be lost to remove "this corrupting material. It is a "'jurisprudential justification' to kill all the Jews and annihilate Israel, and in that, the Islamic government of Iran must take the helm."


www.catholic.org...

Assuming the accuracy of the report (which I have seen on many sites), that states it pretty clearly I think.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by mobiusmale
 


here we go, a chestnut from the 07/02/2012 catholic online. 2 months ago.

notice the word 'allegedly' in blue header before the main text?

'The article states that because Israel is going to attack Iran's nuclear facilities,
Iran is justified in launching a pre-emptive, cataclysmic attack against the Jewish
state, the doctrine argues.' courtesy of catholic.org

now then lets take this down to a local level.

peradventure you have a gang that is willing to do any and all your dirtywork.
in the process of your power grabbing, fear mongering ways, i
and my family are in the way of your nefarious plans.
you threaten me and imply threats towards my family.
every day upon leaving home, i or my family become distressed
at the gangsta signs, verbal threats etc.
with no-one to assist and legal avenues exhausted i will take it upon myself
to render you and your
gang impotent by any and all means at my disposal.
sounds fair?

with that said i would rather no fighting occured at all. i am all for
peaceful co-existance but when the bullies in the playground want
more and more beyond their fair share, crap will hit the air-conditioning.

f.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by mobiusmale
How about this?


Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is calling for the death of all Jews and the destruction of Israel. On the Web site, called Alef, Khamenei says the opportunity must not be lost to remove "this corrupting material. It is a "'jurisprudential justification' to kill all the Jews and annihilate Israel, and in that, the Islamic government of Iran must take the helm."


www.catholic.org...

Assuming the accuracy of the report (which I have seen on many sites), that states it pretty clearly I think.


The short answer: Absolutely not!

Part of the long answer comes from Muhammad Sahimi, who recently told Antiwar Radio host Scott Horton that the inflammatory article published by World Net Daily (WND), entitled Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, Annihilate Israel is “totally bogus.”

Muhammad Sahimi is a Professor of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at the University of Southern California (USC). He also frequently writes on Iranian politics for Payvand, the Huffington Post, Antiwar.com and several mainstream news outlets. He has a regular column for the Tehran Bureau of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and is fluent in Farsi.

According to Sahimi, the WND piece by Reza Kahlili is based entirely on an article by Alireza Forghani, who is described by Kahlili as “an analyst and a strategy specialist in [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei’s camp.” However, Kahlili provides no proof of this and expects the reader to take his word for it. In response, Sahimi says that Alireza Forghani is nothing more than an “Iranian blogger” who has “no ties to the Iranian government…no official post anywhere…doesn’t even have a job.”

And what is Forghani’s “doctrine,” pray tell? According to Sahimi, Forghani does talk about a pre-emptive strike on Israel, but only because Israel is threatening to attack Iran. Sahimi compares this to the “Bush Doctrine”—“…take the fight to the enemy overseas before they can attack us again here at home.”

Sahimi goes on to say that Forghani talks about different population densities in various parts of Israel and postulates that if Iran were to attack Israel, these are some of the places Iran’s Shahab-3 missles can reach. “Then [Forghani] talks about—if Iran is to attack Israel—places like railroads, airports, nuclear facilities and so on can also be attacked by Iranian missles,” says Sahimi. “That is what he is saying.”

When Horton asks Sahimi, “Does he say kill all the Jews in Israel?”

“No,” he replies. “I don’t see anything that says that.”

One important thing to note: In the WND piece, Kahlili claims to be quoting from Forghani’s article, and writes in the third paragraph:

It is a “‘jurisprudential justification” to kill all the Jews and annihilate Israel, and in that, the Islamic government of Iran must take the helm.”

Notice that Kahlili does not put full quotations around part of this sentence: no opening quotation>> to kill all Jews and annihilate Israel, and in that, the Islamic government of Iran must take the helm.”



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by fakedirt
 


Disregarding your countless personal slurs, may I ask what is so morbid about having "destructive urges", as you define it? The following allegoric riddles (Game Theory, actually) may shock you due to their inexorable honesty, but let me iterate them to you for the sake of education:

A) Imagine you have two strings. One string is shorter than the other. You want to turn the shorter string into longer than the other, but you're not allowed to change the short string. What do you do? Obviously, shorten the longer string. The lesson is: the destruction of others is the elevation of yourself.

B) You have two trains, one has 5 wagons, the other has only 4. Your goal is to make the smaller train longer than the large one. You may do whatever changes you want (omit, add, replace), but it is more expedient to make as less changes as possible. One option would be to add 1 wagon to the shorter train, and then add another one, arriving at 6 wagons in contrast to 5. (You may as well do the opposite, and omit 2 wagons from the longer train) However, the most simple solution, which requires only a single step, is to remove a single wagon from the longer train, and add the same one to the shorter train. The lesson is: seizing what belongs to other to yourself, is the most expedient solution.

I understand how hard it is for someone who is (probably. I don't personally know you, and I confess that I may be wrong) unacquainted with applying pure, game-theory logic, to solve issues, more so political issues. Nevertheless, leaving emotions aside, you would realize that the fulfillment of aggressive urges is not necessarily a negative consequence; on the contrary, indeed, it is a positive one. Of course, being an individualist, I care for my personal interests rather than those of the state in which I currently reside. However, in theory, the interests of the state coincide many times with those of its ruling clique. Therefore, as a prime minister, one has to address the issue of the state of affairs of his state, several times a day, as he himself is directly involved in these affairs. A successful leader has the people's support, in the vast majority of times. And the people's support is, when discussing democracies, a condition of stepping into the booths of the leader.

Therefore, if I were in charge of the state, I would be interested, for as long as I hold power, to ameliorate the condition of the state, thereby increasing the people's support of myself, and also encouraging, invigorating other states to conduct business with mine, as these states would find that expedient. Applying the lessons I had depicted above, I conclude that, being capable of bringing mass destruction upon other states, and here I had referred to a specific state -- Iran -- the best course of action the leader ought to take is aggressively attacking opponent countries with as much measures as possible, with the aim of increasing fatalities and overall damage to the highest possible amount. This translates to Benjamin Netanyahu raining a few nukes on Tehran. Call it whatever you want: cruel, inhuman, blood-thirst, etc, but the undeniable fact still remains: that relentlessness is profitable.

Of course, this is all somewhat off-topic, but eventually combines into a sound explanation of just how to prolong the endurance of the state's existence, which explains what Israel ought to do. It must not go unnoticed that Iran apprehends all of this, and likewise has determined to annihilate Israel. Now one question remains: will Israel be intelligent enough to preemptively strike Iran, avenging the death of Israeli citizens caused by Iran-supported Arab terrorists, and endeavoring to inflict as much perdition possible on the enemy, or not. Lamentably, albeit I do expect an Israeli strike on Iran, it seems no Israeli leader will have enough courage and prowess to engage in nuclear warfare with Iran, as the situation demands and as normal, shrewd, sane personnel-in-charge-of-states would demand.
edit on 6-4-2012 by RATSOYFY37 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
www.meforum.org...

There you go. The iranian president saying he wants Israel wiped from the map. Now what was that about him never saying that? Its a shame to have people supporting the iranian regime when they are so two faced.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by yuppa
www.meforum.org...

There you go. The iranian president saying he wants Israel wiped from the map. Now what was that about him never saying that? Its a shame to have people supporting the iranian regime when they are so two faced.


seriously? ME again? Do we really need to go through another enlightenment concerning the agendas of the site and its owner?

You people keep regurgitating this same nonsense that has been replied to before.

If you cannot pick an unbiased or neutral site to support your views then perhaps you should rethink what your views are, I have posted a youtube video (from American source) detailing what was said in full, which also links you to the full speech in case you want additional confirmation.

Why not seek truth and not lies? The truth is there for everyone to see.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alexei
Last I remember the Iranian government referred to the Zionist regime aka Israel NOT to Jews some would argue that Israel and Jews are indestinguishable, i would say otherwise. Iran has the secon largest population of jews in the middle east outside of Israel/Palastine. I would say that it that Irans statements are somewhat justified in looking at it from their perspective as Israel has attempted in its military campaigns to expand to its historic biblical borders by continued occupation of the west bank and east jerusalem, once occupied sinai, and golgan hieghts, the latter two being returned to syria and egypt


link calling for removal of zionists regime

elderofziyon.blogspot.com...

what im getting at is though is its not the jews that Iran has such a problem with its the government and their expansionalists policies I personally believe if the Palastinians and Israelis take their religious beliefs and past greivences out of the equation they could come together and create a unified republic of Palastine and Israel or Israel and Palastine to let the Israelis feel better about the name. thats just wishful thinking as Israel believes that southern Syria, Sinai Egypt, the West Bank, all of Jordan and NW Saudi Arabia belong to them anyway by divine right and all that good stuff not bashing them though but they should just stop being so aggressive. Israel has a right to its existance just as all the other countries in the region. The best way to cool down all tension in the middle east is for Israel to recognize an Independent Palastine and withdraw all settlements in the west bank, in exchange for open borders to religious sites. To solve the Jerusalem problem they should make the city itself independent like Vatican City but thats how i would fix the problem.


OH NOW THAT YOU EXPLAIN IT! We should allow Iran to nuke Israel. MAKES SENSE NOW!

What the heck is wrong with you people. Insane sociopaths are everywhere.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela

Originally posted by yuppa
www.meforum.org...

There you go. The iranian president saying he wants Israel wiped from the map. Now what was that about him never saying that? Its a shame to have people supporting the iranian regime when they are so two faced.


seriously? ME again? Do we really need to go through another enlightenment concerning the agendas of the site and its owner?

You people keep regurgitating this same nonsense that has been replied to before.

If you cannot pick an unbiased or neutral site to support your views then perhaps you should rethink what your views are, I have posted a youtube video (from American source) detailing what was said in full, which also links you to the full speech in case you want additional confirmation.

Why not seek truth and not lies? The truth is there for everyone to see.



So unless its from Al jazeera its biased correct? Anyway here is a new link that i tink you might agree with,but its from the NY times. I dont want to be biased! I would think that if its from a person of middle eastern decent it would have been ok. Still You could consider what he said a threat,but the NY times writes it more fair.
www.nytimes.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by yuppa

Originally posted by Jameela

Originally posted by yuppa
www.meforum.org...

There you go. The iranian president saying he wants Israel wiped from the map. Now what was that about him never saying that? Its a shame to have people supporting the iranian regime when they are so two faced.


seriously? ME again? Do we really need to go through another enlightenment concerning the agendas of the site and its owner?

You people keep regurgitating this same nonsense that has been replied to before.

If you cannot pick an unbiased or neutral site to support your views then perhaps you should rethink what your views are, I have posted a youtube video (from American source) detailing what was said in full, which also links you to the full speech in case you want additional confirmation.

Why not seek truth and not lies? The truth is there for everyone to see.



So unless its from Al jazeera its biased correct? Anyway here is a new link that i tink you might agree with,but its from the NY times. I dont want to be biased! I would think that if its from a person of middle eastern decent it would have been ok. Still You could consider what he said a threat,but the NY times writes it more fair.
www.nytimes.com...


Do not worry, since al-Jazeera was caught murdering people after forcing them to admit to lies on camera I do not trust them either...

try UNBIASED

I have already linked to that speech and he never once said that in the speech! www.youtube.com...
edit on 7-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by RATSOYFY37
 



hello alex
no countless personal slurs here, just suspicion if you re-read i am sure you will
get the jist. besides attacking other posters personally is against t and c's

for a moment lets go with your position on the matter.
one side nukes the other and brings it to it's knees. then what?

this will position everyone else with wmd's
to warm up the consoles and seal the hatches. what does logic dictate now?

the use of nukes or any other medium where masses of civilians are slaughtered
for the increased tenureship of another nation? acceptable?


game theory, yes i understand the concept and it works well for x-boxes, ps3's etc.
you shoot an opponent in a game and walk away. you shoot more and you get shot. turn off
the gaming station and it's back to the real world for you with all it's complications.
i suspect if anyone ran with pure logic on planet dirt, they would come to pains
somewhere along the timeline. considerations go beyond ones own logic when interaction
with others is unaviodable

tell me, would you endorse game theory logic to socio-economic considerations?

one example being, we have a group of vunerable,sickly and infirm people who are
depending on the state for an acceptable quality of care and longevity.

would you be in agreement for game theory to dictate the fate of individuals in this group
and for it to decide if they are a burden
on the rest of society and therefore surplus to requirements? methinks a slippery slope
ahead if it's implemented real-world wide.


to apply it to the real world, ridding all diplomatic efforts on either side to find
a middleground, not too sure about that.
humanity is more complicated than game theory imo. it is not absolutes we are dealing with here,
on the contrary, there is more grey area than black and white on many issues regarding israel,
iran and the rest of the geo-political setup in the region. military industrialists will
continue to profit as much as ardent politicians will both during and post tenureship but
will the use of nukes escalate to an extent that their bottom line will eventually diminish to zero?

my suspicion here is if nukes are used on iran or israel, it will forever change the planet
into a burdensome existence with effects not limited to just the borders of conflict. again
an unacceptable outcome from and unacceptable intention.

do you have an explanation as to why the iaea are so afraid of forcing an audit on israels
alleged stockpile of nuclear weapons or does that conflict with game theory logic to address
the issue?

i appreciate your reply and assure you no personal attack with malice was intended.


regards fakedirt.
edit on 7-4-2012 by fakedirt because: manners



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 07:56 AM
link   
not all jews, just wipe israel off the map

details, details



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


You are a hateful person.

Observe what the regime is doing to these kids:


And I know it must be hard to be an apologist for Iranian Muslims as an Arab, you should hear Iranian Muslims talking behind your backs ;-)

But please do explain to me, where he says anything else than "Death to Israel" in the following clip(at 1 minute 6 seconds into the clip).



He cleary says: "Marg bar Israil" which directly translates to "Death to Israel"...as can be read in the subtitles but you never know how certain people might want to INTERPRET the translation.

So really, don't make a fool out of yourself, like all those who pander to the Islamic regime do.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by Jameela
 


You are a hateful person.

He cleary says: "Marg bar Israil" which directly translates to "Death to Israel"...as can be read in the subtitles but you never know how certain people might want to INTERPRET the translation.

So really, don't make a fool out of yourself


Seeing as how you attacked me personally, which is against T&C on this site, I would like to state for the record I take offense to that, this is not indicative of attempting to discuss a topic, but rather attack the person in effort to distract from topic.

Marg Bar Israel;

Death definition;

: the passing or destruction of something inanimate

Is the Israeli state not a state?

(Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a sovereign political power

which by definition is;

Sovereignty in government is that public authority which directs or orders what is to be done by each member associated in relation to the end of the association. It is the supreme power by which any citizen is governed and is the person or body of persons in the state to whom there is politically no superior.



The Chant means, Israel's system of governance will (or must) pass

Again, this has nothing to do with killing Jews or the Jewish people.

This has to do with being against the existence of a governing power that has committed hundreds of war crimes, (over 400 according to the UN) is oppressive Palestinians who live outside the sphere of Israeli influence and outside the Israeli state, Israel has an extreme expansionist policy in regards to lands of other sovereign nations outside the state the Israel. (I could say more but I believe everyone understands all this, as we have been witness to it all)




edit on 7-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


Yes, and since when do Arabs explain Farsi to Iranians? Fact is, you don't know the culture or the ignorance it breeds. So please, stay on your side of the fence.


The Chant means, Israel's system of governance will (or must) pass

Again, this has nothing to do with killing Jews or the Jewish people.


That is your interpretation. How many of the ignorant and kept-in-the-dark supporters of the Islamic regime know it's about Israel and not Jewish people? Ow wait, you didn't think about that, you only thought about your own personal interpretation. Which is fine, just don't project it on ALL those people that you do not know.



posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


Did you read the NY times article? That one sort of agreed with you a bit. Still we are people who take your word literally because we have learned to do that after so many times we did not and someone died. If he would go on worldwide tv and break it down into his actual meaning it would be different. He needs to do that if he is not actually meaning to destroy Israel,and the jews. Personally anyone who says a nations people should be drove into the sea is not a good guy in my opinion.






top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join