IMHO, more demonic hatred from Iran.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,173784,00.html
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO, more demonic hatred from Iran.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,173784,00.html
Getting in to your mason jars a bit early are we nad?Originally Posted by nadB
A great read guys!
''All of Them With Shield and Helmet"
Prophecy - Signs
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Jack Kinsella - Omega Letter Editor
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dismissed international criticism of his call for Israel's annihilation, saying, "They [Israelis] are cheeky humans and they think that the entire world should obey them. They destroy Palestinian families and expect nobody to object to them," Ahmadinejad said, asserting his comments "are the exact words of the Iranian people".
It was the first time since early in the days of the Islamic Revolution that such a high-ranking Iranian official has openly called for the destruction of Israel.
Ahmadinejad made his comments during Iran's annual hatefest called 'Jerusalem Day.' Iran's 'Jerusalem Day' is a carnival-like event during which one can express his hatred for the Jews, burn a few flags and meet with jihadist recruiters looking for suicide bombing candidates.
Protestors in Tehran and other Iranian cities burned Israeli flags and held banners displaying anti-Israeli slogans including "Death to Israel, Death to America".
Ahmadinejad also said "anyone who signs a treaty which recognizes the entity of Israel means he has signed the surrender of the Muslim world", and warned Muslim leaders who recognize Israel that they "face the wrath of their own people".
Noted David Horovitz in the Jerusalem Post, " The man was standing at a podium bearing a large poster blaring the title of the gathering, in English: 'The world without Zionism'. He was stating, calmly and confidently, that such a world was indeed entirely within reach... This week, in the boldest language imaginable, Ahmadinejad made plain that, where Israel is concerned, a nuclear Iran under his watch would be anything but benign."
Yediot Aharonot said in an editorial; "What is worrying, other than the minor issue that one day we might all turn into dust because of a nervous Iranian missile, is that 60 years after the Holocaust a leader of a state again openly threatens to destroy the Jews."
Haaretz also heard echoes of the Holocaust in Ahmadinejad's speech, writing; "The open call to destroy the state of Israel highlights the comparison with another leader who was elected by his people in 1933 [Adolf Hitler], whose agenda included an open call to destroy the Jewish people."
Israel immediately called for an emergency session of the UN security council.
"We have decided to open a broad diplomatic offensive," said Israeli foreign minister, Silvan Shalom.
Israeli PM Ariel Sharon is also demanding that Iran to be expelled from the UN. "A country that calls for the destruction of another people cannot be a member of the UN," he said.
Kofi Annan, in what, for him, was an unusually harsh public condemnation, expressed his "dismay" yesterday at Mr Ahmadinejad's remarks and warned Tehran that all UN members had agreed to "refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity ... of any state".
One wonders. Even Israel?
The Russian Interfax News Agency reported today that, while the Russians condemned Ahmadinejad's comments as having 'provided added grounds for sending the dispute over Iran's nuclear program to the UN Security Council,' it plans no change in Moscow's nuclear policy vis a vis the Islamic republic.
"Our position regarding Iran has not changed," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Interfax during a visit to Jordan.
So, in a nutshell, we have the government of Iran promising to wipe Israel from the face of the earth and the government of Russia pledging to continue its efforts to provide Tehran with the nuclear means to do so.
Although it is a mortal sin under the UN Charter for one nation to advocate the destruction of another, particularly for ethnic reasons, the most forceful adjective that Kofi Annan could come up with to describe the UN's official position was 'dismay'.
The stage is not only set, but the current situation reads like a dress rehearsal for the fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophesied 'Gog-Magog' invasion of Ezekiel 38-39.
To summarize the prophecy, the prophet Ezekiel, writing during the Babylonian Captivity (606-536 BC) foretold the formation of an alliance in the 'latter years' that would launch a sneak attack/invasion of Israel.
Ezekiel identified the leader of this alliance as "Gog and Magog" whom many scholars more credentialed than I have identified as comprising modern Russia and some of the various 'Stans'.
Gog's chief lieutenant is identified as 'Persia', the traditional historical name for modern Iran. Persia is joined by Ethiopia and Libya, (modern North Africa) together with much of the Middle Eastern Muslim world.
"After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them." (Ezekiel 38:8)
The identity of the invasion target could not be more clear. 'Brought back from the sword, gathered out of many people against the mountains of Israel, which have always been waste' -- this can only refer to modern Israel. No previous historical incarnation of Israel meets Ezekiel's specifications.
Although Russia is the titular head of the invasion force, Persia is the catalyst. Ezekiel says Russia's participation is reluctant at best; Ezekiel says God will "put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth," (38:4) when " at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought." (Ezekiel 38:10)
And what is the United Nations doing during all this time?
Incredibly, Ezekiel not only identifies them as being dominated by the Western nations; "the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof" but he says their response amounts to little more than a weak diplomatic protest.
"Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil?" (38:13)
Russia and Persia are currently joined at the hip by their joint nuclear project, the schizophrenic nature of which puts Moscow at odds with the rest of the world.
There is little doubt that a nuclear Iran would make good on Ahmadinejad's threat with only minimal provocation. Moscow simultaneously condemns Iran for making it while supply it with the means to make the threat good.
And, while the Western world might express 'dismay' at a Moscow-led sneak invasion, it is unlikely that it will risk nuclear war with the Russians over Israel.
Washington might, but the Europeans certainly wouldn't, leaving only Israel's never-confirmed nuclear arsenal between Jerusalem and the barrier mountains separating it from the West Bank.
Ezekiel, writing from his historical vantage point two thousand years before Columbus sailed the ocean blue, gave this description of the battlefield:
"And I will plead against him with pestilence and with blood; and I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone." (38:22)
Now, let's leave Ezekiel aside for a moment and pretend we are prophets writing from our vantage point in history, trying to predict three years hence.
Israeli intelligence determines Iran is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad's call for wiping Israel from the map is now a practical possibility.
Since the US is currently involved in operations with Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, it is up to Israel to take out Iran's nuclear facilities or live under the threat of instant annihilation at the whims of guys like Ahmadinejad.
With no other choice, Israel launches its strike, taking out much of Iran's nuclear infrastructure, together with the thousands of Russian contractors, scientists, security personnel and administrators stationed there.
Iran, furious at being deprived of its nuclear ambitions, turns to the wounded Russians and together, they launch a surprise retaliatory invasion of the Jewish state.
Neither Europe nor the UN are prepared to stand against nuclear Moscow, particularly in light of Russian casualties inflicted by Israel in an attack that meets the definition of an act of war under international law.
Such an attack would provide all the excuse necessary for the rest of the Arab world to declare war on Israel and join in on the invasion.
That scenario puts the invading army on the mountains of Israel. It leaves Israel with the choice between its own annihilation and use of nuclear weapons to destroy the invaders.
Sound about right?
The above scenario is not only possible, it is probable, given that Iran will not give up its nuclear ambitions and Israel can not allow Iran to achieve them.
And it is an exact match to Ezekiel's prophecy, right down to the various members of the various alliances and their various positions relative to Israel as they exist in this fifth year of the 21st century.
The only differences are that my scenario is an educated guess based on conditions as they exist today, and I could be wrong about the exact order and detail.
Ezekiel wrote from Babylon, one hundred and fifty years after the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed by Sargon the Assyrian and two thousand five hundred years before a sovereign nation called 'Israel' would again be numbered among the nations of the world.
"Remember this, and shew yourselves men: bring it again to mind, O ye transgressors. Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure." (Isaiah 46-8:10) Excerpted from the Omega Letter Daily Intelligence Digest, Volume 49, Issue 28.
Of course, Israel was wiped off the map from 70 AD until 1948. So even if they have to exist in the final days, they could disappear for another millineum and then reappear in time to make that possible.
Of course Israel as a people and a nation were never "wiped off of the map". They were, however, scattered and despersed around the world per prophecy. IMHO, the Bible only mentions one regathering out of the nations of the world and rebirth of Israel, which happened in 1948 and then the possiblility, per one's interp. of the prophecy of Jesus comments about new fig tree (Israel) leaf growth (Israel land added, Gaza strip, Golan Heights, West Bank,Parts of Jerusalem ect..) in the 1967 war. Israel, at various times in the Bible is referenced as a fig tree.
Matthew 24: 1 - 51 End days and including the mention of the fig tree analogy and possible Israel last days prophecy
Mark 13: 1 - 37 likewise
Last edited by TYLERTECHSAS; 10-30-2005 at 10:51 PM.
OK.. that last one was probably a tad far out there for many. Just one interpretation.
i agree with mc (he actually beat me to it). there is no reason why isreal (as a sovereign nation) can't be wiped off the map and then restored again later. many people think we are in the end times now (and we may be, of course) but folks have thought that for centuries. it could be many more centuries before Jesus returns (or it could be tonight).
Exactly what I had in mind arkansasbob. The interpretation that the 1948 creation of Israel is a fulfillment of prophecy is just that -- an interpretation. It may be wrong. God's plan may be far more sophisticated than we can understand.
And that doesn't even count that the whole interpretation may be off. The Jews interpreted all the OT passages about the Christ as one coming, not two. So who's to say that Tyler's interpretation of one regathering of Israel is correct?
The point is that assuming that God will fix everything so we don't have to worry about it may be a bit presumptuous on our part.
I agree with your above " it could be many more centuries before Jesus returns (or it could be tonight)." We "do not know the day or the hour" but IMHO we can sure know the season. Afterall, Christ in the NT and the prophets in the OT, gave us the signs of his coming for a reason. I do believe that Israel is God's true timepiece for these end days events and that the miracle of their becoming a nation again, after almost 2000 years, started the clock. Tick... Tick.... Tick
This Iranian President is just plain crazy. Will we or Israel try to take him out soon?
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/14/D8GVSUC0H.html
Iran Leader: Israel Will Be Annihilated
Apr 14 12:34 PM US/Eastern
Email this story
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran
The president of Iran again lashed out at Israel on Friday and said it was "heading toward annihilation," just days after Tehran raised fears about its nuclear activities by saying it successfully enriched uranium for the first time.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called Israel a "permanent threat" to the Middle East that will "soon" be liberated. He also appeared to again question whether the Holocaust really happened.
"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation," Ahmadinejad said at the opening of a conference in support of the Palestinians. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."
Ahmadinejad provoked a world outcry in October when he said Israel should be "wiped off the map."
On Friday, he repeated his previous line on the Holocaust, saying: "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"
The land of Palestine, he said, referring to the British mandated territory that includes all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, "will be freed soon."
He did not say how this would be achieved, but insisted to the audience of at least 900 people: "Believe that Palestine will be freed soon."
"The existence of this (Israeli) regime is a permanent threat" to the Middle East, he added. "Its existence has harmed the dignity of Islamic nations."
The three-day conference on Palestine is being attended by officials of Hamas, the ruling party in the Palestinian territories.
Iran has previously said it will give money to the Palestinian Authority to make up for the withdrawal of donations by Western nations who object to Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel and renounce violence. But no figure has been published.
On Tuesday, Ahmadinejad announced that Iran had successfully enriched uranium using a battery of 164 centrifuges, a significant step toward the large-scale production of enriched uranium required for either fueling nuclear reactors or making nuclear weapons.
The United States, France and Israel accuse Iran of using a civilian nuclear program to secretly build a weapon. Iran denies this, saying its program is confined to generating electricity.
The U.N. Security Council has given Iran until April 28 to cease enrichment. But Iran has rejected the demand. The chief of Israeli military intelligence, Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, was quoted Wednesday as saying Iran could develop a nuclear bomb "within three years, by the end of the decade."
Here he goes again! This is a most amazing and frightening interview with someone who is potentially wicked beyond belief. His circumvention of questions and distortions of concepts is amazing. Der Spiegel is one of Germany’s leading news sources and they have approached the issues directly and well. Ahmadinejad has circumvented most every question and distorted each one to the point of lunacy. He is deceptively dangerous. Careful reading at first leads you to think he is having flight of ideas but this is not so. There is great malevolence here. The West must take every word from this man seriously. He is truly a Hitler II and all of the West is included in his thinking. -
THE INTERVIEW: WHAT NUKE? WHAT THREAT? WHAT HOLOCAUST?
ONLINE - May 30, 2006, 12:01 AM
URL: http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,418660,00.html
SPIEGEL Interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
"We Are Determined"
In an interview with SPIEGEL, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad discusses the Holocaust, the future of the state of Israel, mistakes made by the United States in Iraq and Tehran's nuclear conflict with the West.
http://r03.webmail.aol.com/17385/aol...+Mail&partId=4http://r03.webmail.aol.com/17385/aol...+Mail&partId=4<![endif]>
AP
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "By siding with Iran, the Europeans would serve their own and our interests."
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, you are a soccer fan and you like to play soccer. Will you be sitting in the stadium in Nuremberg on June 11, when the Iranian national team plays against Mexico in Germany?
Ahmadinejad: It depends. Naturally, I'll be watching the game in any case. I don't know yet whether I'll be at home in front of the television set or somewhere else. My decision depends upon a number of things.
SPIEGEL: For example?
Ahmadinejad: How much time I have, how the state of various relationships are going, whether I feel like it and a number of other things.
SPIEGEL: There was great indignation in Germany when it became known that you might be coming to the soccer world championship. Did that surprise you?
Ahmadinejad: No, that's not important. I didn't even understand how that came about. It also had no meaning for me. I don't know what all the excitement is about.
SPIEGEL: It concerned your remarks about the Holocaust. It was inevitable that the Iranian president's denial of the systematic murder of the Jews by the Germans would trigger outrage.
Ahmadinejad: I don't exactly understand the connection.
SPIEGEL: First you make your remarks about the Holocaust. Then comes the news that you may travel to Germany -- this causes an uproar. So you were surprised after all?
Ahmadinejad: No, not at all, because the network of Zionism is very active around the world, in Europe too. So I wasn't surprised. We were addressing the German people. We have nothing to do with Zionists.
SPIEGEL: Denying the Holocaust is punishable in Germany. Are you indifferent when confronted with so much outrage?
Ahmadinejad: I know that DER SPIEGEL is a respected magazine. But I don't know whether it is possible for you to publish the truth about the Holocaust. Are you permitted to write everything about it?
SPIEGEL: Of course we are entitled to write about the findings of the past 60 years' historical research. In our view there is no doubt that the Germans -- unfortunately -- bear the guilt for the murder of 6 million Jews.
Ahmadinejad: Well, then we have stirred up a very concrete discussion. We are posing two very clear questions. The first is: Did the Holocaust actually take place? You answer this question in the affirmative. So, the second question is: Whose fault was it? The answer to that has to be found in Europe and not in Palestine. It is perfectly clear: If the Holocaust took place in Europe, one also has to find the answer to it in Europe.
On the other hand, if the Holocaust didn't take place, why then did this regime of occupation ...
SPIEGEL: ... You mean the state of Israel...
Ahmadinejad: ... come about? Why do the European countries commit themselves to defending this regime? Permit me to make one more point. We are of the opinion that, if an historical occurrence conforms to the truth, this truth will be revealed all the more clearly if there is more research into it and more discussion about it.
SPIEGEL: That has long since happened in Germany.
Ahmadinejad: We don't want to confirm or deny the Holocaust. We oppose every type of crime against any people. But we want to know whether this crime actually took place or not. If it did, then those who bear the responsibility for it have to be punished, and not the Palestinians. Why isn't research into a deed that occurred 60 years ago permitted? After all, other historical occurrences, some of which lie several thousand years in the past, are open to research, and even the governments support this.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, with all due respect, the Holocaust occurred, there were concentration camps, there are dossiers on the extermination of the Jews, there has been a great deal of research, and there is neither the slightest doubt about the Holocaust nor about the fact - we greatly regret this - that the Germans are responsible for it. If we may now add one remark: the fate of the Palestinians is an entirely different issue, and this brings us into the present.
Ahmadinejad: No, no, the roots of the Palestinian conflict must be sought in history. The Holocaust and Palestine are directly connected with one another. And if the Holocaust actually occurred, then you should permit impartial groups from the whole world to research this. Why do you restrict the research to a certain group? Of course, I don't mean you, but rather the European governments.
SPIEGEL: Are you still saying that the Holocaust is just "a myth?"
Ahmadinejad: I will only accept something as truth if I am actually convinced of it.
SPIEGEL: Even though no Western scholars harbor any doubt about the Holocaust?
Ahmadinejad: But there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part. Hence, an impartial group has to come together to investigate and to render an opinion on this very important subject, because the clarification of this issue will contribute to the solution of global problems. Under the pretext of the Holocaust, a very strong polarization has taken place in the world and fronts have been formed. It would therefore be very good if an international and impartial group looked into the matter in order to clarify it once and for all. Normally, governments promote and support the work of researchers on historical events and do not put them in prison.
SPIEGEL: Who is that supposed to be? Which researchers do you mean?
Ahmadinejad: You would know this better than I; you have the list. There are people from England, from Germany, France and from Australia.
SPIEGEL: You presumably mean, for example, the Englishman David Irving, the German-Canadian Ernst Zündel, who is on trial in Mannheim, and the Frenchman Georges Theil, all of whom deny the Holocaust.
Ahmadinejad: The mere fact that my comments have caused such strong protests, although I'm not a European, and also the fact that I have been compared with certain persons in German history indicates how charged with conflict the atmosphere for research is in your country. Here in Iran you needn't worry.
SPIEGEL: Well, we are conducting this historical debate with you for a very timely purpose. Are you questioning Israel's right to exist?
Ahmadinejad: Look here, my views are quite clear. We are saying that if the Holocaust occurred, then Europe must draw the consequences and that it is not Palestine that should pay the price for it. If it did not occur, then the Jews have to go back to where they came from. I believe that the German people today are also prisoners of the Holocaust. Sixty million people died in the Second World War. World War II was a gigantic crime. We condemn it all. We are against bloodshed, regardless of whether a crime was committed against a Muslim or against a Christian or a Jew. But the question is: Why among these 60 million victims are only the Jews the center of attention?
SPIEGEL: That's just not the case. All peoples mourn the victims claimed by the Second World War, Germans and Russians and Poles and others as well. Yet, we as Germans cannot absolve ourselves of a special guilt, namely for the systematic murder of the Jews. But perhaps we should now move on to the next subject.
Ahmadinejad: No, I have a question for you. What kind of a role did today's youth play in World War II?
SPIEGEL: None.
Ahmadinejad: Why should they have feelings of guilt toward Zionists? Why should the costs of the Zionists be paid out of their pockets? If people committed crimes in the past, then they would have to have been tried 60 years ago. End of story! Why must the German people be humiliated today because a group of people committed crimes in the name of the Germans during the course of history?
SPIEGEL: The German people today can't do anything about it. But there is a sort of collective shame for those deeds done in the German name by our fathers or grandfathers.
Ahmadinejad: How can a person who wasn't even alive at the time be held legally responsible?
SPIEGEL: Not legally but morally.
Ahmadinejad: Why is such a burden heaped on the German people? The German people of today bear no guilt. Why are the German people not permitted the right to defend themselves? Why are the crimes of one group emphasized so greatly, instead of highlighting the great German cultural heritage? Why should the Germans not have the right to express their opinion freely?
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we are well aware that German history is not made up of only the 12 years of the Third Reich. Nevertheless, we have to accept that horrible crimes have been committed in the German name. We also own up to this, and it is a great achievement of the Germans in post-war history that they have grappled critically with their past.
Ahmadinejad: Are you also prepared to tell that to the German people?
SPIEGEL: Oh yes, we do that.
Ahmadinejad: Then would you also permit an impartial group to ask the German people whether it shares your opinion? No people accepts its own humiliation.
SPIEGEL: All questions are allowed in our country. But of course there are right-wing radicals in Germany who are not only anti-Semitic, but xenophobic as well, and we do indeed consider them a threat.
Ahmadinejad: Let me ask you one thing: How much longer can this go on? How much longer do you think the German people have to accept being taken hostage by the Zionists? When will that end - in 20, 50, 1,000 years?
SPIEGEL: We can only speak for ourselves. DER SPIEGEL is nobody's hostage; SPIEGEL does not deal only with Germany's past and the Germans' crimes. We're not Israel's uncritical ally in the Palestian conflict. But we want to make one thing very clear: We are critical, we are independent, but we won't simply stand by without protest when the existential right of the state of Israel, where many Holocaust survivors live, is being questioned.
Ahmadinejad: Precisely that is our point. Why should you feel obliged to the Zionists? If there really had been a Holocaust, Israel ought to be located in Europe, not in Palestine.
SPIEGEL: Do you want to resettle a whole people 60 years after the end of the war?
Ahmadinejad: Five million Palestinians have not had a home for 60 years. It is amazing really: You have been paying reparations for the Holocaust for 60 years and will have to keep paying up for another 100 years. Why then is the fate of the Palestinians no issue here?
SPIEGEL: The Europeans support the Palestinians in many ways. After all, we also have an historic responsibility to help bring peace to this region finally. But don't you share that responsibility?
Ahmadinejad: Yes, but aggression, occupation and a repetition of the Holocaust won't bring peace. What we want is a sustainable peace. This means that we have to tackle the root of the problem. I am pleased to note that you are honest people and admit that you are obliged to support the Zionists.
SPIEGEL: That's not what we said, Mr. President.
Ahmadinejad: You said Israelis.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we're talking about the Holocaust because we want to talk about the possible nuclear armament of Iran -- which is why the West sees you as a threat.
Ahmadinejad: Some groups in the West enjoy calling things or people a threat. Of course you're free to make your own judgment.
SPIEGEL: The key question is: Do you want nuclear weapons for your country?
Ahmadinejad: Allow me to encourage a discussion on the following question: How long do you think the world can be governed by the rhetoric of a handful of Western powers? Whenever they hold something against someone, they start spreading propaganda and lies, defamation and blackmail. How much longer can that go on?
SPIEGEL: We're here to find out the truth. The head of state of a neighboring country, for example, told SPIEGEL: "They are very keen on building the bomb." Is that true?
Ahmadinejad: You see, we conduct our discussions with you and the European governments on an entirely different, higher level. In our view, the legal system whereby a handful of countries force their will on the rest of the world is discriminatory and unstable. One-hundred and thirty-nine countries, including us, are members of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) in Vienna. Both the statutes of IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as well as all security agreements grant the member countries the right to produce nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. That is the legitimate legal right of any people. Beyond this, however, IAEA was also established to promote the disarmament of those powers that already possessed nuclear weapons. And now look at what's happening today: Iran has had an excellent cooperation with IAEA. We have had more than 2,000 inspections of our plants, and the inspectors have obtained more than 1,000 pages of documentation from us. Their cameras are installed in our nuclear centers. IAEA has emphasized in all its reports that there are no indications of any irregularities in Iran. That is one side of this matter.
SPIEGEL: IAEA doesn't quite share your view of this matter.
Ahmadinejad: But the other side is that there are a number of countries that possess both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. They use their atomic weapons to threaten other peoples. And it is these powers who say that they are worried about Iran deviating from the path of peaceful use of atomic energy. We say that these powers are free to monitor us if they are worried. But what these powers say is that the Iranians must not complete the nuclear fuel cycle because deviation from peaceful use might then be possible. What we say is that these countries themselves have long deviated from peaceful usage. These powers have no right to talk to us in this manner. This order is unjust and unsustainable.
SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, the key question is: How dangerous will this world become if even more countries become nuclear powers -- if a country like Iran, whose president makes threats, builds the bomb in a crisis-ridden region?
Ahmadinejad: We're fundamentally opposed to the expansion of nucleaar-weapons arsenals. This is why we have proposed the formation of an unbiased organization and the disarmament of the nuclear powers. We don't need any weapons. We're a civilized, cultured people, and our history shows that we have never attacked another country.
SPIEGEL: Iran doesn't need the bomb that it wants to build?
Ahmadinejad: It's interesting to note that European nations wanted to allow the shah's dictatorship the use of nuclear technology. That was a dangerous regime. Yet those nations were willing to supply it with nuclear technology. Ever since the Islamic Republic has existed, however, these powers have been opposed to it. I stress once again, we don't need any nuclear weapons.
We stand by our statements because we're honest and act legally. We're no fraudsters. We only want to claim our legitimate right. Incidentally, I never threatened anyone - that, too, is part of the propaganda machine that you've got running against me.
SPIEGEL: If this were so, shouldn't you be making an effort to ensure that no one need fear your producing nuclear weapons that you might use against Israel, thus possibly unleashing a world war? You're sitting on a tinderbox, Mr. President.
Ahmadinejad: Allow me to say two things. No people in the region are afraid of us. And no one should instill fear in these peoples. We believe that if the United States and these two or three European countries did not interfere, the peoples in this region would live peacefully together as they did in the thousands of years before. In 1980, it was also the nations of Europe and the United States that encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack us.
Our stance with respect to Palestine is clear. We say: Allow those to whom this country belongs to express their opinion. Let Jews, Christians and Muslims say what they think. The opponents of this proposal prefer war and threaten the region. Why are the United States and these two or three European nations opposed to this? I believe that those who imprison Holocaust researchers prefer war to peace. Our stance is democratic and peaceful.
SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have long gone a step further than you and recognize Israel as a fact, while you still wish to erase it from the map. The Palestinians are ready to accept a two-state solution while you deny Israel its right to existence.
Ahmadinejad: You're wrong. You saw that the Palestinian people elected Hamas in free elections. We argue that neither you nor we should claim to speak for the Palestian people. The Palestinians themselves should say what they want. In Europe it is customary to call a referendum on any issue. We should also give the Palestinians the opportunity to express their opinion.
SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have the right to their own state, but in our view the Israelis naturally have the same right.
Ahmadinejad: Where did the Israelis come from?
SPIEGEL: Well, if we tried to work out where people have come from, the Europeans would have to return to east Africa where all humans originated.
Ahmadinejad: We're not talking about the Europeans; we're talking about the Palestinians. The Palestinians were there, in Palestine. Now 5 million of them have become refugees. Don't they have a right to live?
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, doesn't there come a time when one should accept that the world is the way it is and that we must accept the status quo? The war against Iraq has put Iran in a favorable position. The United States has suffered a de facto defeat in Iraq. Isn't it now time for Iran to become a constructive power of peace in the Middle East? Which would mean giving up its nuclear plans and inflammatory talk?
Ahmadinejad: I'm wondering why you're adopting and fanatically defending the stance of the European politicians. You're a magazine, not a government. Saying that we should accept the world as it is would mean that the winners of World War II would remain the victorious powers for another 1,000 years and that the German people would be humiliated for another 1,000 years. Do you think that is the correct logic?
SPIEGEL: No, that's not the right logic, nor is it true. The Germans have played a modest, but important role in post-war developments. They do not feel as though they have been humiliated and dishonored since 1945. We are too self-confident for that. But today we want to talk about Iran's current mission.
Ahmadinejad: Then we would accept that Palestinians are killed every day, that they die in terrorist attacks, and that houses are being destroyed. But let me say something about Iraq. We have always favored peace and security in the region. For eight years, the Western countries provided arms to Saddam in the war against us, including chemical weapons, and gave him political support. We were against Saddam and suffered severely because of him, so we're happy that he has been toppled. But we don't accept a whole country being swallowed under the pretext of wanting to topple Saddam. More than 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives under the rule of the occupying forces. Fortunately, the Germans haven't been involved in this. We want security in Iraq.
SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, who is swallowing Iraq? The United States has practically lost this war. By cooperating constructively, Iran might help the Americans consider their retreat from the country.
Ahmadinejad: This is very interesting: The Americans occupy the country, kill people, sell the oil and when they have lost, they blame others. We have very close ties to the Iraqi people. Many people on both sides of the border are related. We have lived side by side for thousands of years. Our holy pilgrimage sites are located in Iraq. Just like Iran, Iraq used to be a center of civilization.
SPIEGEL: What are you trying to say?
Ahmadinejad: We have always said that we support the popularly elected government of Iraq. But in my view the Americans are doing a bad job. They have sent us messages several times asking us for help and cooperation. They have said that we should talk together about Iraq. We publicly accepted this offer, although our people do not trust the Americans. But America has responded negatively and insulted us. Even now we're contributing to security in Iraq. We will hold talks only if the Americans change their behavior.
SPIEGEL: Do you enjoy provoking the Americans and the rest of the world now and then?
Ahmadinejad: No, I'm not insulting anyone. The letter that I wrote to Mr. Bush was polite.
SPIEGEL: We don't mean insult, but provoke.
Ahmadinejad: No, we feel animosity toward no one. We're concerned about the American soldiers who die in Iraq. Why do they have to die there? This war makes no sense. Why is there war when there is reason as well?
SPIEGEL: Is your letter to the president also a gesture toward the Americans that you wish to enter into direct negotiations?
Ahmadinejad: We clearly stated our position in this letter on how we view the problems in the world. Some powers have befouled the political atmosphere in the world because they consider lies and fraud to be legitimate. In our view that is very bad. We believe that all people deserve respect. Relationships have to be regulated on the basis of justice. When justice reigns, peace reigns. Unjust conditions aren't sustainable, even if Ahmadinejad does not criticize them.
SPIEGEL: This letter to the American president includes a passage about Sept. 11, 2001. The quote: "How could such an operation be planned and implemented without the coordination with secret and security services or without the far-reaching infiltration of these services?" Your statements always include so many innuendos. What is that supposed to mean? Did the CIA help Mohammed Atta and the other 18 terrorists conduct their attacks?
Ahmadinejad: No, that's not what I meant. We think that they should just say who is to blame. They should not use Sept. 11 as an excuse to launch a military attack against the Middle East. They should take those who are responsible for the attacks to court. We're not opposed to that; we condemned the attacks. We condemn any attack against innocent people.
SPIEGEL: In this letter you also write that Western liberalism has failed. What makes you say that?
Ahmadinejad: You see, for example you have a thousand definitions of the Palestian problem and you offer all sorts of different definitions of democracy in its various forms. It does not make sense that a phenomenon depends on the opinions of many individuals who are free to interpret the phenomenon as they wish. You can't solve the problems of the world that way. We need a new approach. Of course we want the free will of the people to reign, but we need sustainable principles that enjoy universal acceptance - such as justice. Iran and the West agree on this.
SPIEGEL: What role can Europe play in the resolution of the nuclear conflict, and what do you expect of Germany?
Ahmadinejad: We have always cultivated good relations with Europe, especially with Germany. Our two peoples like each other. We're eager to deepen this relationship.
Europe has made three mistakes with respect to our people. The first mistake was to support the shah's government. This has left our people disappointed and discontent. However, by offering asylum to Imam Khomeini, France earned a special position that it lost again later. The second mistake was to support Saddam in his war against us. The truth is that our people expected Europe to be on our side, not against us. The third mistake was Europe's stance on the nuclear issue. Europe will be the big loser and will achieve nothing. We don't want to see that happen.
SPIEGEL: What will happen now in the conflict between the West and Iran?
Ahmadinejad: We understand the Americans' logic. They suffered damage as a result of the victory of the Islamic Revolution. But we're puzzled why some European countries are opposed to us. I sent out a message on the nuclear issue, asking why the Europeans were translating the Americans' words for us. After all, they know that our actions are aimed toward peace. By siding with Iran, the Europeans would serve their own and our interests. But they will suffer only damage if they oppose us. For our people is strong and determined.
The Europeans risk losing their position in the Middle East entirely, and they are ruining their reputation in other parts of the world. The others will think that the Europeans aren't capable of solving problems.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we thank you for this interview.
Interview conducted by Stefan Aust, Gerhard Spörl and Dieter Bednarz in Tehran.
The latest from this evil clown.
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/746081.html
I've said it before, I'll say it again, how can someone say they want peace in the same sentence in which they state their opposition should be eliminated.What the hell is the cease-fire for when you say that the opposition should be eliminated. Do you need time to get ready???"Although the main solution is for the elimination of the Zionist regime, at this stage an immediate cease-fire must be implemented," Ahmadinejad said, according to state-run television in a report posted on its Web site.
I agree 100%. I also am beginning to believe that this fanatic needs to be assassinated before he starts WWIII. That is, if he hasn't already.
Interesting. I have read similar accounts but doubt anything will happen.
Iranian cataclysm forecast Aug. 22
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=51445
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
