"Iran Has No Nuclear Weapons Program"

McSack

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
5,647
A quote the copied verbatim from a bad english translation they got from an Iranian newspaper.

Here's a real link for you :
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php?articleid=11025


I could say the same for you. When searching for a nice link on the whole thing, lo and behold, the 10th link on the page was this :
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=87770&page=3

So apparently the fact that the link has been posted before in a thread you participated in would show that you're being willfully ignorant.
Don't see the link or any posts refuting the quote:confused:
If you read the rest of the thread you'll notice that my post had more to do with what the narrow definition of what the Nataz installation represented in the context of IAEA monitoring.

Don't let your rabid pro-americanism blind you to what is really happening in the world. ;)
Don't know where you got this from, my comment was more to do with what has been generally accepted as the view of the current regime in Iran


If you want to argue semantics here's a quote from your link:
The full quote translated directly to English:

"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
Please explain the "real" difference here other than that Israel or a Map are not specifically mentioned :confused:
"The regime occupying Jerusalem" at the moment is Israel

"must vanish from the page of time" surely cannot be assumed to mean anything other than destroyed :confused:

I am neither pro- nor anti- US. I just don't understand the apparent total support of a despotic, pro-terrorist leader just for the sake of being against bush:confused::confused:

[edit] oh and if I was in the mood I could probably track down 500 "official" translations of the infamous "wipe Israel from the planet" speech supporting that this is actually what the glowing ahemi meant :)
 
Last edited:

Xarog

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
19,041
Don't see the link or any posts refuting the quote:confused:
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showpost.php?p=1230297&postcount=49

If you read the rest of the thread you'll notice that my post had more to do with what the narrow definition of what the Nataz installation represented in the context of IAEA monitoring.
Point is, the link was posted before.

Don't know where you got this from, my comment was more to do with what has been generally accepted as the view of the current regime in Iran
It was a snide reply which mimiced the snide remark you originally made to trek.


If you want to argue semantics here's a quote from your link:

Please explain the "real" difference here other than that Israel or a Map are not specifically mentioned
Certainly.

"The regime occupying Jerusalem" at the moment is Israel
No, actually it's the zionist regime in control of Israel. It does not refer to israel as a state at all. Much like Bush's calls for "regime change".

"must vanish from the page of time" surely cannot be assumed to mean anything other than destroyed :confused:
Err. Yeah, only if dying of natural causes is the same thing as murder. :rolleyes:

Saying that something needs to fade into the past is very different from suggesting that something needs to be faded into the past. In this case, Saying that the zionists need to dissappear from the page of time is simply a comment saying that the zionists are a bad set of people and their principles need to be left behind.

Saying they need to be wiped off the map implies that someone is actually doing the wiping. This is an actual threat.

As you can see, the two versions are dramatically different.

I am neither pro- nor anti- US. I just don't understand the apparent total support of a despotic, pro-terrorist leader just for the sake of being against bush:confused::confused:
Errr, I think you need to look more closely at people's posts. Debunking false US claims about any particular regime cannot be considered fullblown support for that regime.

Just because the US lied about Saddam's WMD cache never turned him into a nice person.

[edit] oh and if I was in the mood I could probably track down 500 "official" translations of the infamous "wipe Israel from the planet" speech supporting that this is actually what the glowing ahemi meant :)
You could, but all of them would simply be more direct copies of the same Iranian newspaper that first published the news article.
 
Last edited:

trek_mambo

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
520
I'm sorry. But for how much longer are we going to argue about the US lead by Bush and the injustices they bring apron the world. How long will it take untill we will learn from the pages of history and start to learn that if it happened once, it will happen again. We do History in school, and keep logs of global events and political tides for a reason... so that we cannot repeat the same mistakes as a people and play into the hands of those who ruthlessly want to take power. We argue continuously about the US and 99.9% of the time we discover that they have evil or atleast grey intentions. When will we finally learn to give up and just make our minds up, and say no to these power-hungry warmongers? Now we are going to go into war with Iran, and I bet you like Idiots we will support them at mass scale or if not... we will atleast be apathetic and let them plunder a few more million innocent lives.
 

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
46,512
I cant think of a country that has not abused its super power status... but better the US than Russia, anyone in the Middle East or China.
 

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
39,216
Bush and everyone who stands by his war policies are terrorists. nuff said. it's ok for them to have WMD but no one else can? bleh. georgie has killed as many, if not more people than saddam. only difference is, georgie makes it look like he's saving the world and hence no one gives a ****. saddam just killed people cos he was a bad@ss and that's why it was morally acceptable for him to be invaded and killed. people actually believe that georgie is good cos he's saving the world. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight :rolleyes:
if georgie really wants to eradicate WMD, he should go to North Korea. if georgie really wants to remove tyrants(besides himself), he should go to Zim and do the same to mugabe, as he did to saddam. he seems to be doing the same thing his daddy dearest did.
 
Last edited:

Frankie

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
5,785
Bush and everyone who stands by his war policies are terrorists.
And what do we call those that call for the Teddy Bear teacher to be killed in the name of their "faith", or the ones that sentence the rape victim to jail and lashes, or the ones that danced in the street when the WTC was hit, or the violent protests when they assumed the popes remarks linked their peaceful religion to violence,.............. ?
 

mercurial

MyBB Legend
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
39,216
And what do we call those that call for the Teddy Bear teacher to be killed in the name of their "faith", or the ones that sentence the rape victim to jail and lashes, or the ones that danced in the street when the WTC was hit, or the violent protests when they assumed the popes remarks linked their peaceful religion to violence,.............. ?
that video was debunked a long time ago. go do some research. that was archived video from 1991.
 

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
46,512
that video was debunked a long time ago. go do some research. that was archived video from 1991.
...and the others? (assuming ure right), there was more than one point. Lets also not forget poor Danish cartoonists.
 

chiskop

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
9,221
And what do we call those that call for the Teddy Bear teacher to be killed in the name of their "faith", or the ones that sentence the rape victim to jail and lashes, or the ones that danced in the street when the WTC was hit, or the violent protests when they assumed the popes remarks linked their peaceful religion to violence,.............. ?
We could call them extremists, at the least, or terrorists where appropriate, but lets at least use the same criteria for both the US and everybody else.

In my book, if you cause terror to the civilian population, you are by definition, a terrorist.

BTW - we're discussing Iran here and the two specific incidents that you mentioned above have no connection with Iran.
 

Frankie

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2007
Messages
5,785
BTW - we're discussing Iran here and the two specific incidents that you mentioned above have no connection with Iran.
I note you don't make similar comment about the posts made by the Bin Laden wannabe's.
 

chiskop

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
9,221
I was responding to your post. Nobody else seems to be confused, as has kept the conversation on the US / Iran. (Apart from the inevitable sniping)
 
Last edited:

trek_mambo

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
520
Frankie, I am afraid you have become worst than Alanf85.
Your reasoning is that a entire nation of people can all be classified terrorists based on the idea that one woman got apprehended for calling a teddy bear Mohamed. Your ideas of terrosism is very narrow and almost always limited to people that come from the Middle East. It is sad, but the majority of people these days reason exactly like you, conveniently forgetting the millions of people the US gov is killing without reason.

I am ashamed of you. You're not even American and thus have no reason to delude yourself on the situation. So let's be honest and fair. Not ignorant and more like the people we say we hate... the terrorists.
 

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
46,512
Frankie, I am afraid you have become worst than Alanf85.
Your reasoning is that a entire nation of people can all be classified terrorists based on the idea that one woman got apprehended for calling a teddy bear Mohamed. Your ideas of terrosism is very narrow and almost always limited to people that come from the Middle East. It is sad, but the majority of people these days reason exactly like you, conveniently forgetting the millions of people the US gov is killing without reason.

I am ashamed of you. You're not even American and thus have no reason to delude yourself on the situation. So let's be honest and fair. Not ignorant and more like the people we say we hate... the terrorists.
Something about a pot and a kettle and foot in mouth disease...
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,480
Aljazeera is and has been taken over by the US and UK for propaganda purposes a long time ago. I can remember a time where Aljazeera actually broadcasted real news... but now its amongst CNN and BBC on my DSTV bouquet .
Hey dumbo do you have any proof to back this pro America press you keep bleating on about?
 
Last edited:

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,210
Quick search yields:

*Saudi US ambassador Bandar buys 20 percent stake in al Jazeera
*BBC runs Al Jazeera: http://www.richardsonmedia.co.uk/al jazeera origins.html
*Al Jazeera and US ties: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0215-04.htm
*Al Jazeera and US ties: http://www.friendsofaljazeera.org/node/2393?PHPSESSID=40df3e2280103cb54d62d3e07a0dc952
Al-Jazeera has been censored a little(or maybe alot) but they still are able to release some stuff that never gets shown on CNN or BBC, another show I like is Listening Post which criticizes the media(not only western).
 
Last edited:

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
46,512
Al Jazeera is a pretty good news station to watch, just dont expect news reporting in the middle east to be very balanced (very critical of some ME countries, but mention very little about some others...). Oh, and expect the stuff on israel and the US to be very unbalanced.

But there coverage of dodgy 3rd world countries is more comprehensive than any of the other stations so I spend several hours a day watching it.
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,480
European Arabs Launch Campaign to Stop Al-Jazeera Broadcasts in Europe

Arabs in Europe have launched a public campaign to stop Al-Jazeera TV broadcasts in Europe. In a petition, they accuse the channel of fostering extremism among European Arab youth and of supporting terrorism.

While the petition's initiators have not provided their names, it seems likely that they are Iraqi expatriates; although various Arab news websites, such as Elaph, [1] have reported on the campaign, the petition itself has been posted primarily on Iraqi websites. These sites include the Iraqi news site Sotaliraq; [2] the Iraq of Tomorrow news site; [3] the Al-Najaf News site; [4] the website of Al-Fayhaa TV, a liberal Iraqi station; [5] the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan website; [6] Bahzani, a news and opinion website focusing on the Yazidi community and other Iraqi minorities; [7] the Yezidi Community website; [8] the website of the GilgamishCenter for Kurdish Studies and Research; [9] and the Kurdistan Times e-journal. [10]

In addition, on November 28, 2007, Iraqi exile Joseph Shallal wrote an article on the Arab left-liberal Modern Discussion website urging a boycott of Al-Jazeera.

The following are excerpts from the petition and from Shallal's article:

"Since Its Inception, Al-Jazeera Has Chosen the Path of Fostering Violence and Hatred"

"Why should Al-Jazeera be blocked in liberal Europe?

"More than 10 years after the emergence of the extremist Al-Jazeera channel, the time has come for Arabs who live in Europe and believe in a free Europe to defend the principles of a continent that has sacrificed millions of victims to reach its current state of progress, respect for human rights, rejection of extremism, and rejection of the fostering of hatred.

"Since its inception, Al-Jazeera TV has chosen the path of fostering violence and hatred in the world, and has acted so as to be an arm of terrorist forces, such as Al-Qaeda and other extremist forces. [Al-Jazeera TV] has already been prevented from operating in many countries, and some of its presenters and technical crew have been arrested for their involvement in aiding obscurantist terrorist forces like Al-Qaeda and others."


"The Time Has Come for… 'The Bin Laden Channel' to Face Its Day of Reckoning on the European Continent"

"The time has come for Al-Jazeera TV, whose name has become 'the bin Laden channel,' to face its day of reckoning on the European continent.

"It would be difficult, in this brief [overview], to provide examples of the calamitous influence, danger, and ignominy that Al-Jazeera TV has presented and continues to present. Every day that this channel [continues to] broadcast constitutes a clear violation of the principles of the media, and poisons the minds of the youth…"


Al-Jazeera is Exploiting Europe's Democratic Environment in Order to Wholeheartedly Oppose Freedom and Respect

"One cannot remain silent in the face of the dangerous insinuations broadcast by Al-Jazeera, that are aimed at trying to show that there is an extremist religious campaign against Muslims in Europe.

"One cannot remain silent, given the statements of European political and cultural researchers as to Al-Jazeera's dangerous influence on the Arab youth in Europe.

"One cannot remain silent in the face of [Sheikh Yousef] Al-Qaradhawi calling Christians and Westerners 'infidels' on Al-Jazeera, [and in the face of] his calls for violence.

"European governments cannot but note Al-Jazeera's record in the Middle East, and the restricting orders issued against it in countries such as Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. Perhaps these countries are not models of the kind of democracy found in Europe - but their judges and media personnel presented clear and irrefutable evidence of Al-Jazeera's involvement in actions unbefitting a media outlet.

"One cannot remain silent in the face of Al-Jazeera's continued exploitation of the European continent's democratic environment in order to practice a media policy that is wholeheartedly opposed to the freedom and respect that European principles promote.

"It is not our intention here to mention further examples of the Qatari Al-Jazeera channel's extremism. We will leave it to every free and sincere Arab individual to remember the many hours of anger he has spent viewing Al-Jazeera's destructive discourse."


"This is a campaign of Arabs and Europeans aimed at implementing peaceful pressure against European governments and the European Union to stop broadcasting by the extremist Al-Jazeera satellite channel on European cable networks, as a first step towards stopping the channel from broadcasting over the European satellite [service] Hotbird…

"This is an appeal to all Arabs and Europeans, those who live in the European continent and those outside it, to add their names to the campaign.

"This is an appeal to all academics and intellectuals, to provide us with their testimony regarding the terrorist channel.

"This is an appeal to all lawyers and rights specialists, in Europe and elsewhere, to help us with their legal expertise in order to draw up a legal paper that we can present to the European parliaments and the EU.

"This is an appeal to you, as an Arab and a European, and as a consumer, to join us in pressuring the European cable networks to remove Al-Jazeera… You do not want yourself, or anyone close to you, to turn to extremism and to hatred for the countries that have given us so much love.

"Sign your name with us, and take a stand against hatred and extremism. Sign on to our campaign for 'a Europe without Al-Jazeera.'


"When Will Al-Jazeera's Hatred for Iraq and the Iraqis End?"

In an article titled "When Will Al-Jazeera's Hatred for Iraq and the Iraqis End?" published November 28, 2007 by the Arab left-liberal Modern Discussion website, Joseph Shallal, an Iraqi exile living in Germany, wrote that Al-Jazeera is biased against Iraq, and urged a boycott against it. (It is not clear whether Shallal is connected to the petition initiative.) He also argued that Qatar, which sponsors Al-Jazeera, is hypocritical, since it is home to the largest U.S. military base in the region:

"The Al-Jazeera channel was struck with hysteria after the fall of the late Saddam regime…

"The goal of Al-Jazeera, and of those who stand behind it, is to harm intra-Arab relations as well as relations between Arabs and the countries of the world, and to sow and deepen religious and [Sunni-Shi'ite] sectarianism and hatred among all elements if the Arab region.

"Most guests on its shows are from a single school and tendency… If we look at the Al-Jazeera Direct broadcasts, all we see are things harmful to the Iraqis and to Iraq - speeches, meetings, and conferences by Islamist terrorists from Al-Qaeda and from [other] terrorist organizations…

"At the same time, Al-Jazeera Direct ignores anything positive, inside or outside Iraq… While it carried a speech by wanted Iraqi terrorist Harith Al-Dari, who represents nothing in Iraq, it did not carry the ceremony of Iraqi Patriarch Emmanuel Delly's ordination as cardinal…

"What can we hope for and expect from a channel whose religious spokesman [i.e. Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi] calls day and night for jihad, killing, and terrorism, and issued a fatwa permitting the killing of Iraqis, and another fatwa permitting criminal terrorist suicide operations - so-called martyrdom operations - that violate all international laws[?]…

"The channel [i.e. Al-Jazeera] says that Iraq is occupied. The occupation of Iraq was [based on] international resolutions, and was declared openly by the American administration. What we don't know is how Qatar was occupied and became the largest U.S. base… Did it take place with the agreement of the Al-Jazeera channel and its religious spokesman, or with that of the ruler of Qatar and his group?

"The occupation of Iraq will end one day. But is the ruling family of the Qatari emirate and mini-state capable of expelling the Americans from their land?...

"For these reasons, I call for a boycott of Al-Jazeera, and of Qatar. Every noble Iraqi should refrain from participating in Al-Jazeera programs, and refrain from visiting Qatar. And we demand that European countries remove Al-Jazeera from European satellite [services], particularly Hotbird, and that the channel's employees be denied entry to European and Arab countries because there are question marks regarding some of them - as was the case with Al-Jazeera correspondent and cameraman [Sami Al-Hajj] in Afghanistan.

"We demand that Iraq break off all relations with the mini-state of Qatar, its government, and its biased media…" [11]
Interesting.

The Iraqis are sick of these [-]glorious freedom fighters[/-] terrorists slaughtering them. They've already with the help of the U.S kicked them out of strongholds throughout Iraq. So no surprise to see them go after their propaganda outlet as well now.
 

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,210
European Arabs Launch Campaign to Stop Al-Jazeera Broadcasts in Europe
Interesting.

The Iraqis are sick of these [-]glorious freedom fighters[/-] terrorists slaughtering them. They've already with the help of the U.S kicked them out of strongholds throughout Iraq. So no surprise to see them go after their propaganda outlet as well now.

lol you quoted memri :D

Memri is heavily criticised for being a propaganda like operation located in Washington DC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMRI

"MEMRI was founded in 1998 by Yigal Carmon along with Dr. Meyrav Wurmser."
Founded by a Jew and a neoconservative, no Arabs :D
 
Last edited:

trek_mambo

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
520
I would have said something to the extent of: Memri.org is another piece of bullsh1t, a propagandist ploy to give the illusion that Muslims don't like the 'oppressive' countries they come from. I would probably also have referenced a few sites indicating the exact opposite to what Alanf85 had posted. I would have mentioned that many Muslims are very United on the idea that their home lands are being INVADED by the US without reason. I would have mentioned that without the illusion that AL Jazeera is still run by Muslims that these people as a whole has been absolutely silenced in the western world. I would have mentioned that Muslims now have next to no human rights. I would have mentioned that Alanf85 lives in a privileged suburb and is typing all the crap he sees on CNN and BBC about the 'evil' Muslims in a flat/house that is by enlarge probably still owned by his parents. He rants online all day and all night, he complains but guess what... he dares not speak to ant 'evil doers' he dare not befriend an evil Muslim... simply because CNN tells him that they are evil. He then comes online and never reads a single post to the contrary instead he copy pastes and adds a sound track to it as to make it seem like he knows what he is on about. Alanf85 is a new breed of terrorist, he is one that uses ignorance as a weapon and he and people like him are killing millions of lives in the process. America and the Western World with its allies are run by this type of terrorist... these are the people that cause the death of innocent lives... not Bin Laden... not AL Qaeda.


But since sufferwell has so adequately answered him before me, I will instead sit back and keep quite at the risk of sounding too harsh.
 
Top