NEWS: Iran's President Calls For Israel's Destruction

Originally posted by BostonBill99
When you treat others cruelly and with disrespect, you deserve the same in return.

Thats so true! Whats the weather like in Guantanamo lately?

I guess nobody is asking why. Why, out of the so called blue, is this man poking Israel? We all just go back to our old standby positions some of which don't even matter anymore because we are in the thick of things we can't even begin to understand. I'm going to ask why because maybe it has nothing to do with Israel and more to do with the larger picture. Iran is in trouble and soon will be facing sanctions at best or a Bush war as worst.

If these are true quotes, he using buzz words like "zionism" and "zionist". Words that would stir the most moderate Muslim's blood. He wants to align his interest with arab muslims--he wants it to appear as though Iran is being persecuted by evil old super power come to rape and pillage. This is just the prelude because we are at war and it has to get bigger and nastier, and it has to be there because they believe it.

ps...i don't think a president can be called a freedom fighter--what oppression is he suffering from ??? none, he does the oppressing. he's making decisions on behalf of his people that are down right despicable and despotic.

Originally posted by BostonBill99
And that "which side of the fence you yourself sit on" garbage is just that, garbage. When you treat others cruelly and with disrespect, you deserve the same in return.

By your own justification the United States Goverment is in for a nasty shock soon.

South America.
Africa.
Native American's.
Blacks.
Hispanics...

Oh boy...I can't wait for their judgement day.

this really is nothing new. to my knowledge, the only muslim country to ever recognize israel was egypt under sadat, and it got him assasinated by his own people.

the mullahs have been spouting anti-israeli rhetoric since israels inception in 1947. they will continue to do so until the end of the world, or the end of israel, whichever comes first (probably both at the same time, IMHO).

just because the president of iran is only now saying it publicly doesnt really mean anything....he's been in office less than a year. iran as a theocratic country has been spouting this for years. its just that now, with all the hype over irans nuke program, it makes bigger headlines.

[edit on 26-10-2005 by snafu7700]

Hello, everyone: To those who have taken any time at all to study this issue, this is merely the latest stance in what began long ago, before and including the Crusades, the goal being Muslims taking over all of the countries on earth. Here's a small description:

"When Muhammad, the founder of Islam, died in AD632, Abu Bakr became caliph. Caliph means successor, or “one who comes after.” Abu Bakr wanted everyone around to world to follow Islam and “to submit to Allah.” H.G. Wells said, “With a faith that moves mountains, he set himself simply and sanely to organize the subjugation of the entire world to Allah – with little armies of 3000 or 4000 Arabs.”

Everyone should make note of the word "subjugation", as it is the most descriptive word one can use to indicate what has been happening for centuries, and it is continuing to this day. The radical Muslims are making it worse by the way they "fight" their battles. Look at all the trouble spots on the entire planet, and you see that 80 percent of those battles are caused by Muslims. Are all Muslims terrorists.... no, but most all terrorists are muslims; there's a difference.

One only has to look at the issues between Isreal and the Palestinians (although there are no true "Palestinian" people... they are Arabs). Take some time and research the worlds countries and the demographics of each. You will find that a higher percentage than you mght think of the population of most every country is Muslim. It is no longer "...little armies of 300 to 4000". Wars are not always fought with armies and weapons; Canada, France, America and many other countries now find themselves facing their large numbers of Muslim people who are trying to change the laws of those countries from within, to make Muslim laws more agreeable to the host countries, or to change the laws themselves to favor Muslims. This is even more insideous than an outright war, because it is done "behind the scenes" with no, or little, publicity. The world in general does not hear of these skirmishes.

You can say or think what you will about the current war in Iraq, although the war never was against Iraq, but against Saddam. For the most part it is no longer an "occupation", but instead a "liberation". For whatever reason, President Bush cannot call it what it is... a religious war; a continuation of the Crusades. It could rightfully be called the Third World War; one which started many centuries ago, and will continue for centuries more. The outcome is unclear, and one would bef oolish to even try to guess what t might be. Think what you will of what is happening in Iraq, but it is the first time in history that the people there will decide for itself how it wants to be governed. Indeed, Iraq might have been chosen because it is right between Iran and Syria, both of which have young people who see a better future for their countries, and their people, by becoming a more democratic society. However, we have only to look at how long the battle for world Muslim dominance has been fought, and the battles themselves, to see how difficult this will be.

Christian versus Muslim; One God tells it's people to love one another and to help those in need. and one God (?) who says it is right to kill in the name of its religion. It boggles the mind to think how peace between these two mindsets can ever be achieved.

As for what subz asked, SNIP:
"...Can you do me a favour, can you show me the evidence that shows Iran is after nuclear weapons? Im sure Ive seen "strong belief" coming from the Whitehouse but no where has there been any evidence provided. If you can be a buddy and find me where some one has proof of this, or reported this proof, I would be much obliged" I've included the URL below. Sure, there are many who will doubt the veracity of what is mentioned there, being how it is comes from the "evil" American government, but please note that, as mentioned above, Iran has a large number of young people who have been educated in America, and who are involved in many aspects of the various "projects" in their country. One cannot dismiss the information they provide.

www.state.gov...

Originally posted by zappafan1
Christian versus Muslim; One God tells it's people to love one another and to help those in need. and one God (?) who says it is right to kill in the name of its religion. It boggles the mind to think how peace between these two mindsets can ever be achieved.

Where?

If you bother to learn Arabic you would know the Qu'Ran says not to harm any child of the book/people of the book, unless they have wronged you first.

So please, do show me where he says it is O.K. to kill and play my game like the last bunch of people have done. :-)

I look forward to it.

Now the prophecy from Christian groups who believe a bible code predicts an attack by Iran on Israel seem more believable now...

But i doubt Iran will be stupid enough to attack Israel

Originally posted by BostonBill99
This is the same guy who took our hostages from the Embassy years ago, right? Can there be any doubt that he and his government are nothing but terrorists?

No, it looks like he is not the same guy.

Sources: CIA finds Iranian president likely not hostage-taker

A CIA report has determined with "relative certainty" that Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was not involved in the taking of U.S. hostages 26 years ago, three government officials told CNN.

[edit on 26-10-2005 by andpau66]

Originally posted by andpau66
A CIA report has determined with "relative certainty" that Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was not involved in the taking of U.S. hostages 26 years ago, three government officials told CNN.

[edit on 26-10-2005 by andpau66]

well, of course they have, because the US does not negotiate with terrorists, and that would make the president of iran a terrorist, no? therefore, they could not negotiate with him over anything at all, much less irans nuclear program.

i dont know if he really is or not, but the US govt is not going to admit it even if they know he is.

Originally posted by snafu7700

Originally posted by andpau66
A CIA report has determined with "relative certainty" that Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was not involved in the taking of U.S. hostages 26 years ago, three government officials told CNN.

[edit on 26-10-2005 by andpau66]

well, of course they have, because the US does not negotiate with terrorists, and that would make the president of iran a terrorist, no? therefore, they could not negotiate with him over anything at all, much less irans nuclear program.

i dont know if he really is or not, but the US govt is not going to admit it even if they know he is.

They have a policy not to speak to terrorists?

They must have such a hard time in meetings.

Originally posted by Odium

They have a policy not to speak to terrorists?

They must have such a hard time in meetings.

lol...ok, quit putting words in my mouth. i said negotiate, not speak, and you darn well know it! hehe.

zappafan;

Excellent post

You have voted zappafan1 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Here is a global terrorism database that shows the terrorist groups under "religion" are overwelmingly (almost all of them) Islamic. It should also be noted that most of the terrorist groups under "nationalst/separatist" are also Islamic. I guess it must be the peaceful and tolerant nature of Islam that compells these groups and explains why most of global terrorism has islamic origins.

Countries had better wake up to the fact that Islam is a formidible threat. Relevent topics have been discussed in the following threads:



Religion of Peace Update

Wake up!! Islam is coming in your back door!

Irans new president..."Islam will conquer the world!"

Wow, so much for diplomacy. With fiery public words such as this erupting from it's elected president, it would probably be wise for Iran's umma to also take heed of a line from their nemesis's bible:

"For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind." ~ Hosea 8:7

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

"The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world"

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land"

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map"
(Imam=revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

"The Islamic umma will not allow its historic enemy to live in its heartland," he said in the fiery speech that centred on a "historic war between the oppressor and the world of Islam".
(umma=community)
(oppressor = United States)
"We should not settle for a piece of land," he said of Israel's pullout from the Gaza Strip.

"Anyone who signs a treaty which recognises the entity of Israel means he has signed the surrender of the Muslim world"

"Any leaders in the Islamic umma who recognise Israel face the wrath of their own people."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

"It dates backs hundreds of years. Sometimes Islam has advanced. Sometimes nobody was winning. Unfortunately over the past 300 years, the world of Islam has been in retreat," he lamented.

"One hundred years ago the last trench of Islam fell, when the oppressors went towards the creation the Zionist regime. It is using it as a fort to spread its aims in the heart of the Islamic world."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

"There is no doubt that the new wave in Palestine will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the Islamic world."
(new wave=attacks)
(disgraceful blot=Israel)

english.aljazeera.net...

These antagonistic words compliment his recent social engineering reforms.

A committee of Islamic clerics in Iran, led by the country's new hardline president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this week banned foreign films in an effort to wipe out what they called "corrupt Western culture".

Elements that were specifically named as affronts to the government's vision of Iran's Muslim culture included alcohol and drugs, secularists, liberals, anarchists and feminists.

The ban, which follows Mr Ahmadinejad's campaign promise to promote Islamic culture and confront what he called a cultural invasion by the west, aims to distance the state from the open cultural policies undertaken by former reformist president Mohammad Khatami that encouraged cultural coexistence and dialogue among civilisations.

It is understood that the ban will have little effect on cinemas where few Western films play anyway, but it could dramatically change television, where all channels are controlled by the state and overseen by religious hardliners.

Already, the state-run television station in the holy city of Mashhad in north-eastern Iran has reported that police closed several video clubs last week on grounds that they were offering films inconsistent with Islamic culture.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Now more than ever, I think Iran's under-30YO majority should defy their latest despot's attempts at controlling their destiny while they still have one.


[edit on 26-10-2005 by Vajrayana]

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
Countries had better wake up to the fact that Islam is a formidible threat.

Where have I heard this before? Hmm, checks memory. OH YEAH, "We better wake up to the Communist threat". 1940's-1980's.

Edit to add quotation marks.

[edit on 26-10-2005 by intrepid]

The drama. Oh the rhetoric. It's so silly, really. But then again it's also pretty sick when you look at it closer.

Point A.
This guy obviously has not one iota of compassion for the palestinians. If he did he would't be encouraging "waves of suicide attacks". Young men and women in Palestinian lands would certainly be served better by building them a university rather than sending well trained bombmakers and propogandists to encourage their death. Screw the Palestinians right? They're just tools for the zealots to use.

Point B.
Iran can sit back and quietly fund and arm whichever terrorist groups in the middle east they wish to. Keeping the Isreali's busy with the homicide bombers sure beats trying to fight a war yourself. Hell it's a pretty smart tactic. With every bombing in a market, on a bus, or in a Sbarro's pizza joint, the death mongers in the Iranian gov't can sit back and smile. A few Isreali's bite the dust and the Iranians don't even lose a single soldier. Pretty impressive, and they've been doing it since 1979, wow! I have Sun Tzsu's "the art of war" but I can't find the chapter on sending people of another nation out to attack your enemies mass transit buses with suicide bomb belts.

Point C.
"El Presidente' del WhackJob" has to know that his government is going to have to make some conscessions on it's Nuke program soon. If they don't then they are going to lose the europeans (well not all of them anyway, there'll always be jew haters like british MP George Galloway to support Iran/terrorists/dictators/rogue regimes for fun and profit). Without the Europeans Iran has very little support in the UN. Russia is dealing with the chechnyan islamo-terrorists and if Iran keeps it up Putin might step away too, then Iran has real political AND economic problems. And China, well, Iran can forget counting on their help. China is setting itself up for a major power play in the next decade or so and is sure as hell not gonna let any sand trap in the middle of a god aweful desert to drag it into a conflict. Maybe the Iranian leader is just trying to save some face before he's forced to pack his little nuclear reactor back up in it's box and send it to the UN for safekeeping. Hopefully he's not gonna force the UN to send a Hans Blix type character to roam the Iranian deserts in the scooby doo van. I think we've all had enough of that crap.

Point D.
Refusing to Normalize relations with Isreal? Who's this joker trying to fool? I highly doubt that the Isreali gov't was going to just come on over and ask to borrow a cup of sugar or a leaf blower anyway. What this guy basically said is "I really don't care to be friends with the people we've been secretly funding the murder of for years". Kind of a silly statement. Was there any rumor floating around that Iran was suddenly going to just give Isreal a big bear hug and say "I love you man"? I don't understand the point of that statement, but then again I'm not really his target demographic (I don't praise allah or have access to bomb belts and the Jeruselum bus schedule).

from Vajrayana
Now more than ever, I think Iran's under-30YO majority should defy their latest despot's attempts at controlling their destiny while they still have one.

The entire time I was reading your post, that thought kept popping up in my mind. It seems that they are the only hope for Iran's future. Hopefully, we will continue to recognize that fact and not do anything to alienate that segment of the populace.

On the other hand, trying to stifle a culture from invading yours doesn't usually work. It's doubly hard now, given todays technology. You just can't keep them down on the farm anymore!

Originally posted by jsobecky
On the other hand, trying to stifle a culture from invading yours doesn't usually work. It's doubly hard now, given todays technology. You just can't keep them down on the farm anymore!

I agree, kind of like shoveling crap against the tide, always comes back to hit them in the face even harder. Hopefully this young crew will wake up and realize this sinbad is bent on taking them over the falls.

Originally posted by infinite
Now the prophecy from Christian groups who believe a bible code predicts an attack by Iran on Israel seem more believable now...

similar things are also prophecised in the hadith, but its something like the other way round, a bit hazy and the hadith isn't the most reliable source, but definitely worth looking into.

Originally posted by intrepid
Where have I heard this before? Hmm, checks memory. OH YEAH, "We better wake up to the Communist threat". 1940's-1980's.

The difference here, intrepid, is that back then, while there may have been communist individuals, or even clubs/groups, there weren't entire communities of them. I believe our immigration laws prevented the influx of communists. However, islamists have been allowed to immigrate with relative little interference.

I find it interesting that you chose communism to make your point. While I've referred to Islam as a religion at various times, I believe the truth is that Islam is more a political/social ideology vice a religion because it has its own set of laws (sharia).

The Islamic threat is much greater than the communist threat ever was.

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
The Islamic threat is much greater than the communist threat ever was.

No, I have to disagree on that one. I'd describe the threat of Islam as a more "low rent" version of the communist/socialist threat at best. Communist Russia was a great beast with the potential for real devestation on a global scale. Islamic terrorism is more of a cockroach than a great beast. It's annoying too, but only because it keeps hiding in the cupboards and behind the fridge whenever you flick the lights on. At least with the USSR you knew where to find it, with islamic terror the leadership has to hide and scurry around, maybe put out a mix tape or a new video every few months.