DebateGate

OMG Sirs, these are some GOOD quotes. I know you (or someone else) will find a way to explain them away or discredit their validity, but they are well cited, some JUST AS CONTROVERSIAL (IMO) as the commentary coming from Iran.

---

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!"
-- Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

"[Israel will] create in the course of the next 10 or 20 years conditions which would attract natural and voluntary migration of the refugees from the Gaza Strip and the west Bank to Jordan. To achieve this we have to come to agreement with King Hussein and not with Yasser Arafat."
-- Yitzhak Rabin (a "Prince of Peace" by Clinton's standards), explaining his method of ethnically cleansing the occupied land without stirring a world outcry. (Quoted in David Shipler in the New York Times, 04/04/1983 citing Meir Cohen's remarks to the Knesset's foreign affairs and defense committee on March 16.)

"[The Palestinians] are beasts walking on two legs."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the 'Beasts,"' New Statesman, June 25, 1982.

"The Partition of Palestine is illegal. It will never be recognized .... Jerusalem was and will for ever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for Ever."
-- Menachem Begin, the day after the U.N. vote to partition Palestine.

"(The Palestinians) would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls."
-- Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) Yitzhak Shamir in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

"Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories."
-- Benyamin Netanyahu, then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, former Prime Minister of Israel, speaking to students at Bar Ilan University, from the Israeli journal Hotam, November 24, 1989.

"If we thought that instead of 200 Palestinian fatalities, 2,000 dead would put an end to the fighting at a stroke, we would use much more force...."
-- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, quoted in Associated Press, November 16, 2000.

"I would have joined a terrorist organization."
-- Ehud Barak's response to Gideon Levy, a columnist for the Ha'aretz newspaper, when Barak was asked what he would have done if he had been born a Palestinian.

"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."
-- Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.

"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many (Palestinian) hilltops as they can to enlarge the (Jewish) settlements because everything we take now will stay ours...Everything we don't grab will go to them."
-- Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of the Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, Nov. 15, 1998.

But i am curious, if palestians are really Jordanians wouldn't Jordan be home?

I don't believe that it's the same thing. If you lived in a certain place for generations and were uprooted and tossed somewhere else, you might make a new home there, but it isn't the same thing. IMO.

And even if that is the case, does it make it OK to be forcibly relocated?

Is there a cultural, ethnic or sociological difference between jordanians and palestinians?

No, and that is the argument of those who politically consider themselves to be nationalists - Arabs are Arabs, period. They say it doesn't matter that they were formed into countries by the west - these borders shouldn't matter.

However, the borders were formed. Palestinians living on the west side of the river were uprooted. Jordan was the only Arab country to give them citizenship instead of just a refugee status. They did that because they believe that Arabs are Arabs. But that still doesn't address the problem of the huge burdens on the country caused by the refugee situation. And it doesn't change the fact that there are Palestinians who lost their homes and everything they owned on the other side of the river and want to go back home.

Because this isn't about Isreal (unless of course you're on board with the idea of destroying Israel), it's about Iraq/Iran...

Sirs, you're the one who keeps bringing the Jews and Israel into it. The original idea was that you are expressing selective outrage because you feel it's ok to talk to other countries who have done far worse, but don't think it worth the time to talk to Iran because they denied the Holocaust.

But you're right in this manner, this is the crux of the matter to you ... Israel.  Apparently in your mind, Israel is as bad, if not worse than Iran.  So, if we can talk to Israel, consider it a significant partner & ally, then by God we can talk to Iran, right?

I am pragmatic. Technically, I see it as beside the point entirely because U.S. interests are so strongly tied in with Israel now. But in theory, you are correct.

The problem being that's your perception of how evil Israel is supposed to be.  Perhaps you can help me out here, as I haven't read any reports of the mass killings by Israelis, mass grave sites of Palestinians, Government declarations of how Israel is to rid the region of the Palestinian scurge, etc.  Quite the contrary in fact, as I see & read example after example of Arab/Palestinian/Persian homicide bombers targeting and killing as many innocent civilian men/women & children as they possibly can.   I hear of examples of Palestinian children being taught history that doesn't include Israel as being part of the region.  I see examples of rhetoric coming from Arab leaders,  concluding not their contempt, but active goal in ridding the region of Israel (read; ethnic clensing).  A certain Iranian president comes to mind

Sirs, that's because you don't see a damn thing... and that is not your own fault. Between the apartheid wall and the laws against the Palestinians, it is a slow purge. Even before the apartheid wall. The general idea is to frustrate them so badly they just keep moving out. Demolish their homes, cut down their olive trees. Refuse to give them permits to build new homes. Turn the region into Swiss cheese so that they have to drive 100 miles to visit Grandma who literally lives 10 miles away. Encite them by doing things like their most recent digging by the Al Aqsa Mosque, threatening the foundations (protests all over the region on this one right now). If they try to retailiate in any way for anything done to them, the American press points a finger and says "look what those horrible Palestinians have done now." I've seen Michael Tee say it, and it's one thing I agree with him on - if, say, Canada, did this to the U.S., you would fight just as hard, if not harder. But you just don't and won't see the other side of the coin.

You know what, I have an idea. If you and the Mrs. ever want to come visit the Holy Land and see some beautiful things, let me know. We have a guest apartment here that you can stay in, and we would be happy to be your own personal tour guides. During your visit, we'll tour through the West Bank and Gaza... maybe spend some time. Truly, something you will never forget Sirs. (And I am not being sarcastic, you are always welcome to visit!

I'm gonna pretend you aren't being serious with those last "questions".  Especially since you have yet to answer how and what kind of "talk" would bring Iran into the realm of the rational & reasonable, as you answered that question with another question

Look. President Ahmadine... whatever... is a royal ass. But he WAS elected to his position, which says something for efforts the region is making towards democracy. He has said absolutely stupid things. But this is not a broken down country - like Iraq - that can be trampled down quickly by Americans (even without an insurgency that drags on for years and years). They are very powerful in the region. I believe - truly believe - that it would be foolish to do anything BUT talk to them.

Pardon my ignorance, but for the palestinians to go home wouldn't they have to occupy about half of Jordan?

They already do occupy half of Jordan - Palestinian refugees are more than 50% of the population here. (Add to that more than 1 million Iraqi refugees and you have a very overburdened infrastructure.)

The count is at about 5 million Palestinian refugees. The idea is that they should have the right to return if they choose - not a mandatory call to return. Many Palestinian families have lived elsewhere for generations and are not eager to rip up their new roots.

So I did some searching on President Ahmadinejad's comments on Israel. What was the entire text of the speech he gave? Of course, the media generally only presented one sentence of it. What I found through a compilation on Wikipedia is that Ahmadinejad has a mouth comparable to.... oh, say Donald Rumsfeld. He says something and everyone in Iran cringes. But there was interesting information available about what he said, what he says he meant, and what others think. I just thought it would be interesting to throw it in here.

---

2005 World Without Zionism Speech
In his translation of a speech to the "World Without Zionism" conference held for students in October 2005, Nazila Fathi of The New York Times' Tehran bureau reported Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying, in part:

Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world. But we must be aware of tricks.

Ahmadinejad also claimed in the speech that the issue with Palestine would be over "the day that all refugees return to their homes [and] a democratic government elected by the people comes to power", and denounced attempts to normalise relations with Israel, condemning all Muslim leaders who accept the existence of Israel as "acknowledging a surrender and defeat of the Islamic world."

The speech also indicated that the Iranian President considered Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip to be a trick, designed to gain acknowledgement from Islamic states. In a rally held two days later, Ahmadinejad declared that his words reflected the views of the Iranian people, adding that Westerners are free to comment, but their reactions are invalid.

Translation of phrase "wiped off the map"
Many news sources have presented one of Ahmadinejad's phrases in Persian as a statement that "Israel must be wiped off the map", an English idiom which means to cause a place to stop existing.

Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, translates the Persian phrase as:

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

According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to wipe Israel off the map because no such idiom exists in Persian" and "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translates the phrase similarly:

[T]his regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.

On 20 February 2006, Iran’s foreign minister denied that Tehran wanted to see Israel “wiped off the map,” saying Ahmadinejad had been misunderstood. "Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament. "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognise legally this regime," he said.

In a June 11, 2006 analysis of the translation controversy, New York Times deputy foreign editor Ethan Bronner stated that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map. After noting the objections of critics such as Cole and Steele, Bronner said: "But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his Web site (www.president.ir/eng/), refer to wiping Israel away." Bronner stated: "So did Iran's president call for Israel to be wiped off the map? It certainly seems so. Did that amount to a call for war? That remains an open question."

On June 15, 2006 The Guardian columnist and foreign correspondent Jonathan Steele cites several Persian speakers and translators who state that the phrase in question is more accurately translated as "eliminated" or "wiped off" or "wiped away" from "the page of time" or "the pages of history", rather than "wiped off the map".

A synopsis of Mr Ahmadinejad's speech on the Iranian Presidential website states:

He further expressed his firm belief that the new wave of confrontations generated in Palestine and the growing turmoil in the Islamic world would in no time wipe Israel away.

The same idiom in his speech on December 13, 2006 was translated as "wipe out".

Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out."

Interpretation of speech as call for genocide
The speech was interpreted by some as a call for genocide. For example, Canada's then Prime Minister Paul Martin said, "this threat to Israel's existence, this call for genocide coupled with Iran's obvious nuclear ambitions is a matter that the world cannot ignore."

Cole interprets the speech as a call for the end of Jewish rule of Israel, but not necessarily for the removal of Jewish people:

His statements were morally outrageous and historically ignorant, but he did not actually call for mass murder (Ariel Sharon made the "occupation regime" in Gaza "vanish" last summer[sic]) or for the expulsion of the Israeli Jews to Europe.

In the speech, Ahmadinejad gave the examples of Iran under the Shah, the Soviet Union and Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq as examples of apparently invincible regimes that ceased to exist. Ahmadinejad used these examples to justify his belief that the United States and the State of Israel can also be defeated claiming, "they say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan."

In April 2006, Iran's ambassador was asked directly about Ahmadinejad's position towards Israel by CNN correspondent Wolf Blitzer:[19]

BLITZER: But should there be a state of Israel?

SOLTANIEH: I think I've already answered to you. If Israel is a synonym and will give the indication of Zionism mentality, no.
But if you are going to conclude that we have said the people there have to be removed or they have to be massacred or so, this is fabricated, unfortunate selective approach to what the mentality and policy of Islamic Republic of Iran is. I have to correct, and I did so.

Interpretation of speech as call for referendum
Iran's stated policy on Israel is to urge a one-state solution through a countrywide referendum. Juan Cole and others interpret Ahmadinejad's statements to be an endorsement of the one-state solution, in which a government would be elected that all Palestinians and all Israelis would jointly vote for; which would normally be an end to the "Zionist state".

In November 2005 Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, rejecting any attack on Israel, called for a referendum in Palestine:

We hold a fair and logical stance on the issue of Palestine. Several decades ago, Egyptian statesman Gamal Abdel Nasser, who was the most popular Arab personality, stated in his slogans that the Egyptians would throw the Jewish usurpers of Palestine into the sea. Some years later, Saddam Hussein, the most hated Arab figure, said that he would put half of the Palestinian land on fire. But we would not approve of either of these two remarks. We believe, according to our Islamic principles, that neither throwing the Jews into the sea nor putting the Palestinian land on fire is logical and reasonable. Our position is that the Palestinian people should regain their rights. Palestine belongs to Palestinians, and the fate of Palestine should also be determined by the Palestinian people. The issue of Palestine is a criterion for judging how truthful those claiming to support democracy and human rights are in their claims. The Islamic Republic of Iran has presented a fair and logical solution to this issue. We have suggested that all native Palestinians, whether they are Muslims, Christians or Jews, should be allowed to take part in a general referendum before the eyes of the world and decide on a Palestinian government. Any government that is the result of this referendum will be a legitimate government.

Ahmadinejad himself has also repeatedly called for such solution. Most recently in an interview with Time magazine:

TIME: You have been quoted as saying Israel should be wiped off the map. Was that merely rhetoric, or do you mean it?

Ahmadinejad: [...] Our suggestion is that the 5 million Palestinian refugees come back to their homes, and then the entire people on those lands hold a referendum and choose their own system of government. This is a democratic and popular way.

Mostly for XO. I was in the market the other day (Harris Teeter, I believe) and noticed the pasteurized eggs. Since XO hadn't known about them, I whipped out my cell phone and took a picture for him.

(Click on the small picture for a larger version.)

Interesting. I've never heard of this - does it lessen or eliminate the risk of salmonella? How about bird flu?

I would love to see those in Amman, but I'm not holding my breath. Generally the eggs are so fresh here that I have to wash them... and the cats attack me when I come in the door with the eggs. *Bwak!*

Simple, the folks that we're being urged to 'talk to", to supposedly help bring peace tru diplomacy. are the same folks that pretty much deny it's existance...translated, irrational, if not demented (though honestly, I thought I already answered that question before).

So we should just go to war with them, instead of attempting diplomacy... because they've questioned the Holocaust? (Kill 'em all. They even deny the Holocaust!)

I was on my way out the door to go out to dinner (bit time difference between here and CA, LOL), and something else struck me. Talking to Iran is like talking to Charlie Manson? Since when? Use that comparison for those who were responsible for the Holocaust... not someone who is just asking questions. Sheesh!