Israel's Deputy Prime Minister says Iran did not say we'll wipe Israel out.

Completely non-sensical.

 

Abu Sina wrote: "It is not a good idea to use translators as they distort meanings but I will explain what the Arabic part of the banner means. ... That banner at the bottom says in English 'Down with Israel'. This is fairly accurate. [A] Better meaning would be 'You are doomed Israel' [or] 'Israel is doomed'."

Okay, but according to those translators, that top line along the banner attached to the stage beneath where Ahmadinejad is standing states 'death to Israel'. However, that translation was Farsi or Persian, not Arabic! By distortion you mean to say that 'death to Israel' in Farsi doesn't mean the same thing as it does in English? That's a fair point and I'll come back to that. I tested your 'better meanings' with the online translators, but as you would guess, the results don't look anything like what is on that placard (in Arabic) or the banner (in Farsi)! You of course, want me to consider your initial claim, that an online translator is useless. I want you to prove how, let's say, the Google translator is flawed. One shortcoming is that there is always but one meaning for every word or phrase.

I've looked at these videos where Ahmadinejad is said say 'death to Israel'. I listened to what he said, which is: 'marg bar Is•rael•e', but that's English spelling to sound out what was said in Farsi. The phrase 'marg bar Israel' did translate however. I copied the English to Farsi result and then ran a Farsi to English translation and the result was 'Israel's deadly', which if accurate, would refute MEMRI's interpretation. Tell me, do you know what marg bar Israel means in Farsi? You said the translators can't be trusted and I would agree their value is limited. That said, 'death to Israel', with respect to the material I posted, doesn't appear to be a mistranslation. I do accept that the interpretation can be grossly exaggerated. You note yourself that for a very long time Israel has been linking Iran's perceived intent with interpreted statements made by Iranian leaders. You and others may be inclined to believe that Iranian officials are too stupid to keep from making the same mistake over and over again. To my mind that simply isn't possible. Again, I find Iran to be complicit in hyping the threat they pose.

I have other content I'd be interested in having you break down. Here's a short video, material collected from multiple sources I assume. The initial segment is of interest. The video portion of the segment appears to be official content from an Iranian military parade. Included in the spectacle are their mobile rocket launchers. Several standard trailers are carrying what appears to be some seriously antiquated warheads. But all that are shown have blue placards with statements like; "Israel should be wiped from the map" and "The U.S.A. can do nothing". I find this rather telling, unless of course the video has been manipulated. Surely, you're not going to attribute this to a language barrier...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YJsLGpdByY

I don't believe the following pertains to the same event, but it certainly serves as corroboration.

The debate is over! Iran projects aggression toward Israel. Are they really a threat, worthy of a bombing raid? Absolutely not!

 

I cannot believe that you are arguing with an Arabic speaker using google translate to back up your claims. Surely an Arabic speaker is going to top an internet translation software. I am going with what Abu is saying in that it does not mean death. Google translators cannot get the intricacies of a language,you just have to use their Chinese language tool to see that it spits out all kinds of useless meanings. Are you really posting up an article from a righwing wing news papers as evidence?There is no picture of said poster in that article and who translated it? Did they use google translate as well? Btw you youtube video is a joke to say the least. Your argument is very weak.

 

Man on Fire wrote: "I cannot believe that you are arguing with an Arabic speaker using Google translate to back up your claims. Surely an Arabic speaker is going to top an internet translation software. I am going with what Abu is saying in that it does not mean death. Google translators cannot get the intricacies of a language, you just have to use their Chinese language tool to see that it spits out all kinds of useless meanings. Are you really posting up an article from a rightwing wing news papers as evidence? There is no picture of said poster in that article and who translated it? Did they use Google translate as well? Btw you YouTube video is a joke to say the least. Your argument is very weak."

Well, let me set this for you. I posted two images that apparently linked Ahmadinejad to the hostile threats. Both the placard and the banner had three statements in different languages. Abu addressed what was written in Arabic on the banner along the stage. The top statement is in Farsi. The two languages are one in the same? I acknowledged that the translator has considerable limitations. I asked him if he knew what 'marg bar Israel' meant in Farsi. If the translator is worth anything it refutes the MEMRI video interpretation! Wait and see what he says will ya? So, you dispute the credibility of the YouTube video? Not the narrative but the video appears to be from an Iranian military parade, no? I then posted a mainstream source that I believe is of a different parade, but notes similar characteristics. But you didn't like that one either. Alright, try this one:

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/20...-never-said-israel-must-be-wiped-off-the-map/

 

You posted a youtube video made by God knows who which takes signs and say that they mean something and blow them up. Alarm bells would be ringing in an intelligent persons head by just how the video is presented, but you are not seeing a problem with it for whatever reason. If you looked closely enough at the signs on the poster from your first post you might have noticed that Farsi and Arabic look fairly closely related thus Abu's contention that what is stated in Arabic is not what you say it is could also be attributed to the Farsi. That you have used a google translation tool that I know for a fact cannot translate as least one other language correctly just shows how weak your argument is. Also your story from the Telegraph just says that a sign says something,it does not say who translated,does not even show the sign but you are taking that as gospel.

 

Israel is doomed = اسرائیل محکوم است
Death to Israel = = مرگ بر اسراییل
They look different to me.
Now compare both of them to that picture.

 

Do you speak or read that language? No you do not so you are relying on what to translate it for you?

 

As I already said Arabic is not easy to accurately translate into English and I guess Farsi is the same.

We find the nearest meaning in English but sometimes does not exactly describe OUR meaning. Your language is not as rich as ours.

We also use male and female words which you dont so a lot of what we speak depends on the gender of the word.

YOU SHOULD NEVER rely on translators but ask a native to translate for you to be accurate and I will give you an example using Google translate below

"Those women are in the office working hard"

if you put that int the Google translate it will give you

"هؤلاء النساء هن في مكتب العمل الجاد"

now you would think that this would mean "Those women in the office are working hard"

Now take that Arabic and place it in Google and translate to English

this is what you get

"These women are in the office of the hard work"

Completely different meaning.

See the differerence?

"Those women in the office are working hard"
"These women are in the office of the hard work"


You also MUST take into consideration that there is a very big difference in Standard Arabic and Colloqial Arabic !!!

If you put good standard Arabic into a translator you would get a fairly good translation but not always accurate as we have a richer language.

BUT!! if you put in colloqial spoken in the street and especially by a poor banner maker who makes the banners in his downtown shop you will get some really wild translations!!

Let me give you another example


This is from Fotouh homepage and would be considered decent standard Arabic

ولد د. عبد المنعم أبوالفتوح فى حى الملك الصالح بمصر القديمة لأسرة جاءت الى القاهرة من كفر الزيات بمحافظة الغربية، وكان ترتيبه الثالث بين ستة إخوة كلهم ذكور.
تميز عبد المنعم أبوالفتوح فى الجامعة بنشاطه واهتمامه بشئون زملائه فشغل منصب رئيس اتحاد كلية طب القصر العينى التى كانت فى ذلك الوقت رائدة فى العمل الإسلامى ، ثم أصبح بعد ذلك رئيس اتحاد طلاب جامعة القاهرة ، حين حدثت الواقعة الشهيرة عندما واجه عبد المنعم أبوالفتوح الرئيس السابق السادات أثناء لقاءه معه بثقة وشجاعة فقال له أن الدولة يسود فيها حالة من النفاق ولاتحترم علمائها .
لم يؤثر انشغاله بالعمل العام على دراسته فظل محافظا تفوقه فى جميع سنوات الدراسة وحصل على بكالوريس طب القصر العينى بتقدير جيد جدا ، لكنه حرم من التعيين بسبب نشاطه السياسى واعتقل لعدة أشهر ضمن اعتقالات سبتمبر ١٩٨١ الشهيرة. إلا أنه واصل تفوقه الدراسي وحصل على ماجيستر إدارة المستشفيات كلية التجارة جامعة حلوان .
انضم لحركة الإخوان المسلمين وشغل منصب عضو مكتب الإرشاد بجماعة الإخوان المسلمين منذ عام ١٩٨٧حتى٢٠٠٩.
عقب تخرجه شغل د.عبدالمنعم أبوالفتوح العديد من المناصب السياسية والنقابية مثل منصبه السابق كأمين عام نقابة أطباء مصر ومنصبه الحالى كأمين عام اتحاد الأطباء العرب ، كما امتد عمله العام للعمل الإغاثى والإنسانى من خلال رئاسته للجنة الإغاثة والطوارئ باتحاد الأطباء العرب، التى أرسلت مساعدات طبية وإنسانية إلى ضحايا حادثة سيول أسوان وسيناء وكارثة الدويقة ، كما قامت بتجهيز المستشفيات الميدانية بميدان التحرير خلال الثورة ، وتقديم المعونات لضحايا الثورة الليبية ومجاعات الصومال ، وتوفيرالمساعدات لضحايا الاعتداءات الصهيونية فى فلسطين ولبنان وقطاع غزة .
اعتقل فى عهد مبارك لمدة خمس سنوات لنشاطه السياسي ، حصل خلالها د. عبد المنعم على ليسانس الحقوق من جامعة القاهرة.
يعيش د. عبدالمنعم أبو الفتوح حاليا فى القاهرة مع زوجته التى تعمل كطبيبة نساء وتوليد ولديه ستة أبناء ثلاث إناث يعملن طبيبات وثلاث ذكوريعملون فى مجالات الهندسة والصيدلة والتجارة .


This is what happens when you use Google translate

Born d. Abdel Moneim Abul Fotouh in the neighborhood of ancient Egypt, the king of good for a family came to Cairo Governorate of Kafr El-Zayat Bank, and ranked third among six brothers, all males.
Excellence Abdel Moneim Abul Fotouh at the university for his activity and his interest in the affairs of his colleagues Vchgl as President of the Union Medical College Kasr, which was at that time a leader in the Islamic work, and then later became the President of Students Union University of Cairo, when the incident occurred famous when faced with Abdel Moneim Abul Fotouh former President Sadat During his meeting with him with confidence and courage and said to him that the state dominated by a state of hypocrisy and upholding the scientists.
Did not affect preoccupation with public action on leaving his conservative superiority in all years of study and earned a Bachelor Medicine Kasr very good grade, but he was denied the appointment because of his political and detained for several months in the September 1981 arrests famous. However, he continued academic excellence and received a Magistr Hospital Administration, Helwan University, Faculty of Commerce.
Joined the Muslim Brotherhood and served as a member of the Guidance Bureau of the Muslim Brotherhood since 1987 until 2009.
After graduating fill d. Abdel Moneim Abul Fotouh many of the positions of political and trade union such as his former position as Secretary General Medical Association of Egypt and his current post as Secretary General of the Union of Arab Doctors, also extended his year of work of relief and humanitarian through his presidency of the Relief Committee and Emergency at the Federation of Arab Doctors, which has sent medical aid and humanitarian Seoul to the victims of the incident, Sinai and Aswan Duwaiqa disaster, and has furnished the field hospitals in Tahrir Square during the revolution, and to provide aid to victims of the Libyan revolution and famine Somalia, Toviralamsaaadat to the victims of Zionist aggression in Palestine and Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.
Arrested in the era of Mubarak for a period of five years for his political activity, during which he d. Abdel-Moneim on the Bachelor of Laws from the University of Cairo.
Live d. Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh currently in Cairo with his wife working as a physician and the generation of women and has six children and three females and three doctors working in the fields of Zkoraamlon engineering, pharmacy and commerce.

NOW!!!

Let me show you colloqial from the same site but a comment spoken in colloqial the language used by us in every day life on his site

بعد نزول الشاطر ومرسى ولسه لحد دلوقتى بيتهمو الدكتور انه مرشح الاخوان بجد بقى شئ مستفز ولما بدخل صفحات الاخوان الاقيهم بيتهمو انه خرج عن رأى الجماعة يعنى الدكتور متهم من جميع الاطراف ربنا ينصرك يادكتور ونبنى مصر بمشروع الوطن وان شاء الله ساعتها كل اللى كانو بيتهموك دول هيعتذرولك وهيندمو على كل اللى كانو بيقولو عليك اكتر شخصيه وطنيه بجد وبتحب مصر بجد وعايز تخدم البلد دى


After going down the boy, and a marina and still reduce Delloukty Pethmu Dr. He Brotherhood candidate diligently remained something provocative and the income of pages Brotherhood Alaqém Pethmu he went out saw the group means Dr accused from all sides of our Lord be beside Doctor and build Egypt project home and, God willing Saatha Kol Elly Kano Pethmuk countries Hiatdhirolk Hendmo and all Elly Kano Bicolo you Aktar national figure, hard and hard and Egypt Bthb Want serve the country de

Have you any idea what it says?

Thats what happens when you put Arabic in Google type translators

 

What is the information content of this image?

Exactly!!! It has no context and no verifiable historical value. It is a child; not in uniform; in some unidentifiable place; at a date which cannot be ascertained; with a placard that can be easily manipulated in PhotoShop; in fact this could be some kid in Stockholm.

And the same applies to those images of placard holders posted earlier in this thread. ZIP!!

 

Abu - many years ago - while in Beirut - I enrolled at AUB an Arabic Language course . I failed dismally - a total loss . I've still got my old text books as a reminder of my folly. (wink)

I've been told theres also considerable difference between Modern Standard Arabic and Classical Quran Arabic. Is that so ?

Would you say the difference is as marked as between Old (medieval) + Modern English ? or more ?


IMO - translations are best left to a quaified TEAM of translators before its released to the media Too many pitfalls. .





...

 

Shame you did not complete it

It is hard I admit because it is 4 not one

Quranic is the earliest. It came with no vowels.
Vowels were only added later.

Modern Arabic is used in all Arab speaking countries and is the language of media and literature and so if you read a newspaper it will be understood by all Arab speakers. It uses true Arab words. It has vowels. BUT we would write it without vowels because we know the meaning. Vowels are only used in formal literature. Casual literature/media does not use it.

Colloqial is the street language we all use daily. It uses local words and phrases and these change from Upper to Lower Egypt and from country to country. Egyptian colloqial is not a written language though. Even though we write it it is not formally written. It's the most common but all Egyptians know Standard and colloqial and the differences between them.
we also have english transliteration which I do not accept or like with using 235679 numbers for letters. This is very bad.

The Arab world all understand Egyptian Arabic but not the other way around. We Arabs can all talk in Egyptian to each other. It is the common language. If i have to listen to Lebanese or Maghrib or Iraqi it is hard to understand because they use different dialect and words but we all speak Egyptian we all know what each is saying. Thats because media is Egyptian. Syrians and Iraqi and Gulf all grew up watching Egyptian media.

People do not speak Quranic. You would only hear that by scholars, academics. We understand it but really it is too formal for use in conversation.

Yes as you said it would be like me speaking like Shakespeare if I spoke Quranic

 

This thread is just too precious for words. It just so displays the soft underbelly of the “nuke the *******s” brigade (NTRHB) on this forum
I mean the Israeli Deputy Prime minister, someone who I bet no-one is willing to reason does not have the best of reasons to understand what the “Iran issue” is all about, says that Iran (Ahmadinejad) did not say that that Israel should be wiped out. The NTRHB machinery goes into overdrive to refute this totally unexpected ‘attack’ from what they see as an unlikely source and they respond in panic:

Naiveté?

O-O

After an exceptionally thorough debate a few months ago in which Borat himself participated and ultimately ran out of ammunition, and in which this translation was proved to be utter nonsense, Borat posts the same Myth again!! What makes folk behave in such an utterly irrational head-in-the-sand blinkered bigoted fashion?

Classic CLANGGGG!!

On and on and on shooting at the wrong goalposts because he could not bring himself to register and remember what the real translation was as was shown to him a few months ago.

So finally one of the NTRHB actually CAN remember something (pity the spin is so poor). For a while it seemed as though reality had sunk in with The Doctor’s memory. But not on your life!! A few days later we had this served up as a defence:

I used to think this sort of thing was funny. I now realise just how tragic a hold the Myth repetition has on those who desperately want to believe that the Myths are true.
Khalil brings further sanity to the record with his post:

What is the NTRHB’s response?

I know. Isn’t that just so utterly lame?

But this is probably the most precious of the lot:

He went on to make over a dozen posts on this topic.

 

Abu Sina wrote: "As I already said Arabic is not easy to accurately translate into English and I guess Farsi is the same. We find the nearest meaning in English but sometimes does not exactly describe OUR meaning. You also MUST take into consideration that there is a very big difference in Standard Arabic and Colloquial Arabic!!! If you put good standard Arabic into a translator you would get a fairly good translation but not always accurate as we have a richer language."

You also added results or failures from the use of the translator. Well done! That said, I don't find your condemnation to be an absolute and in particular, what is written in Farsi. Speak plainly sir, are the translations of what is on the placard and the banner blatant misrepresentations or not? Your smoking gun would've been to provide the soft message in English, that translates and yields the result on either the placard or the banner. See? That would be irrefutable! Or, if you were able to explain why a softer interpretation doesn't produce what's on the placard or the banner. As Slyhunter points out, plugging in 'Israel is doomed' doesn't cut it, whereas, death to Israel does! We're to believe that is a coincidence? Perhaps, we can agree that whatever is implied on the placard and the banner, it pertains to Israel and is negative? Isn't it possible that Iran is fully aware of how such phrases will be interpreted by Israel and the west?

Anyway, there is other material, some of which I provided you. Do you have an opinion there? I think you and other liberals should consider these next two sources. The first, from the Guardian, is dated 2003:

Here's an AFP report from 2007:

I say yet again, none of this warrants an attack on Iran. It poses no real threat to the state of Israel. All that I mean to establish here is that Iran is party to the grossly exaggerated threat that they are perceived by some to be.

 

You are taking the word of a google article as gospel. This sounds to me like yet more propaganda.

 

trout mask replica wrote: "You are taking the word of a Google article as gospel. This sounds to me like yet more propaganda."

It's not a Google article, is corroborated with a Guardian article plus everything else I've cited and you reject it all because...? Pretty stupid.

 

you see

you just proved my point

No matter how I say it and I try to explain in the simplest terms in my ability in English and still you cannot get the meaning of what I am saying.

If you cannot understand after so may of my posts trying to explain then how do you even begin to understand a banner with no one explaining it? You tell me?

For me what I have written is very simple, very understandable. Maybe it is you that has a comprehension problem in reading English plainly? Is that the case or is it that you refuse to accept anyhting that does not fit with your agenda?

Again in very simple language especially for you and the slow to understand.

The Arabic on the banner if said in our language can mean 2 things.

Now read very carefully

Israel is doomed ( this means Israel is doomed ) I cannot put it any plainer for you because I think it is quite simple.

It can also mean the death of Israel. This means a wish for something. It is NOT A VERB, NOT AN ACTION. A WISH.

Now to make it really simple for the kindergarten child.

Israel is not a human breathing thing. It is an entity. You cannot pick it up or hold it in your hand. It is a concept. That is what that Arabic defines. A concept. Therefore it CANNOT DIE as the word DIE in ENGLISH is something that DIES. In my language something cannot die that is a concept physically. That is why there is no verb. You can compare to English all you like but they are different. Our meanings are different to yours.
To us simply the other meaning is It is gone, a wish for it's disappearance, or disappearance, it no longer exists.
How can I make it any simpler for you?

Why are you insisting that I do not know my own language and meaning?
Why are you insisting that when 2 Arab speakers ask each other what that phrase means they agree on its meaning but you the expert insist that we are wrong?
You want to take control of our countries, our resources, our people, our governments and now your arrogance even wants to take control of how WE interpret OUR OWN language now??????????

YOU are telling US what OUR language means when we speak?

have you all become so utterly crazed with power and malice and arrogance?

OR is it that you have been so completely fooled by the zionist wasps that you know you are wrong BUT just cannot admit it so you carry on repeating and repeating the same old nonsense day after day year after year trying to convince your own mad brains it is so?

It's really unbelievable what we have to deal with regarding the Americans........................it really is!

 

Seriously you are just grasping at straws now.

 

Interesting that you should quote the Guardian I recall a later article dated 2006 excuse th C +P - I would'nt be doing it justice by cherry picking certain paragraphs, beside its NOT a simple + straightforward as Israel's propagandists /hasbarists have tried to make out ..

-------

Lost in translation

Experts confirm that Iran's president did not call for Israel to be 'wiped off the map'. Reports that he did serve to strengthen western hawks.


"My recent comment piece explaining how Iran's president was badly misquoted when he allegedly called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" has caused a welcome little storm. The phrase has been seized on by western and Israeli hawks to re-double suspicions of the Iranian government's intentions, so it is important to get the truth of what he really said.

I took my translation - "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" - from the indefatigable Professor Juan Cole's website where it has been for several weeks.

But it seems to be mainly thanks to the Guardian giving it prominence that the New York Times, which was one of the first papers to misquote Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, came out on Sunday with a defensive piece attempting to justify its reporter's original "wiped off the map" translation. (By the way, for Farsi speakers the original version is available here.)

Joining the "off the map" crowd is David Aaronovitch, a columnist on the Times (of London), who attacked my analysis yesterday. I won't waste time on him since his knowledge of Farsi is as minimal as that of his Latin. The poor man thinks the plural of casus belli is casi belli, unaware that casus is fourth declension with the plural casus (long u).

The New York Times's Ethan Bronner and Nazila Fathi, one of the paper's Tehran staff, make a more serious case. They consulted several sources in Tehran. "Sohrab Mahdavi, one of Iran's most prominent translators, and Siamak Namazi, managing director of a Tehran consulting firm, who is bilingual, both say 'wipe off' or 'wipe away' is more accurate than 'vanish' because the Persian verb is active and transitive," Bronner writes.

The New York Times goes on: "The second translation issue concerns the word 'map'. Khomeini's words were abstract: 'Sahneh roozgar.' Sahneh means scene or stage, and roozgar means time. The phrase was widely interpreted as 'map', and for years, no one objected. In October, when Mr Ahmadinejad quoted Khomeini, he actually misquoted him, saying not 'Sahneh roozgar' but 'Safheh roozgar', meaning pages of time or history. No one noticed the change, and news agencies used the word 'map' again."

This, in my view, is the crucial point and I'm glad the NYT accepts that the word "map" was not used by Ahmadinejad. (By the way, the Wikipedia entry on the controversy gets the NYT wrong, claiming falsely that Ethan Bronner "concluded that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map".)

If the Iranian president made a mistake and used "safheh" rather than "sahneh", that is of little moment. A native English speaker could equally confuse "stage of history" with "page of history". The significant issue is that both phrases refer to time rather than place. As I wrote in my original post, the Iranian president was expressing a vague wish for the future. He was not threatening an Iranian-initiated war to remove Israeli control over Jerusalem.

Two other well-established translation sources confirm that Ahmadinejad was referring to time, not place. The version of the October 26 2005 speech put out by the Middle East Media Research Institute, based on the Farsi text released by the official Iranian Students News Agency, says: "This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history." (NB: not "wiped". I accept that "eliminated" is almost the same, indeed some might argue it is more sinister than "wiped", though it is a bit more of a mouthful if you are trying to find four catchy and easily memorable words with which to incite anger against Iran.)

MEMRI (its text of the speech is available here) is headed by a former Isareli military intelligence officer and has sometimes been attacked for alleged distortion of Farsi and Arabic quotations for the benefit of Israeli foreign policy. On this occasion they supported the doveish view of what Ahmadinejad said.

Finally we come to the BBC monitoring service which every day puts out hundreds of highly respected English translations of broadcasts from all round the globe to their subscribers - mainly governments, intelligence services, thinktanks and other specialists. I approached them this week about the controversy and a spokesperson for the monitoring service's marketing unit, who did not want his name used, told me their original version of the Ahmadinejad quote was "eliminated from the map of the world".

As a result of my inquiry and the controversy generated, they had gone back to the native Farsi-speakers who had translated the speech from a voice recording made available by Iranian TV on October 29 2005. Here is what the spokesman told me about the "off the map" section: "The monitor has checked again. It's a difficult expression to translate. They're under time pressure to produce a translation quickly and they were searching for the right phrase. With more time to reflect they would say the translation should be "eliminated from the page of history".

Would the BBC put out a correction, given that the issue had become so controversial, I asked. "It would be a long time after the original version", came the reply. I interpret that as "probably not", but let's see.

Finally, I approached Iradj Bagherzade, the Iranian-born founder and chairman of the renowned publishing house, IB Tauris. He thought hard about the word "roozgar". "History" was not the right word, he said, but he could not decide between several better alternatives "this day and age", "these times", "our times", "time".

So there we have it. Starting with Juan Cole, and going via the New York Times' experts through MEMRI to the BBC's monitors, the consensus is that Ahmadinejad did not talk about any maps. He was, as I insisted in my original piece, offering a vague wish for the future.

A very last point. The fact that he compared his desired option - the elimination of "the regime occupying Jerusalem" - with the fall of the Shah's regime in Iran makes it crystal clear that he is talking about regime change, not the end of Israel. As a schoolboy opponent of the Shah in the 1970's he surely did not favour Iran's removal from the page of time. He just wanted the Shah out.

The same with regard to Israel. The Iranian president is undeniably an opponent of Zionism or, if you prefer the phrase, the Zionist regime. But so are substantial numbers of Israeli citizens, Jews as well as Arabs. The anti-Zionist and non-Zionist traditions in Israel are not insignificant. So we should not demonise Ahmadinejad on those grounds alone.

Does this quibbling over phrases matter? Yes, of course. Within days of the Ahmadinejad speech the then Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, was calling for Iran to be expelled from the United Nations. Other foreign leaders have quoted the map phrase. The United States is piling pressure on its allies to be tough with Iran.

Let me give the last word to Juan Cole, with whom I began. "I am entirely aware that Ahmadinejad is hostile to Israel. The question is whether his intentions and capabilities would lead to a military attack, and whether therefore pre-emptive warfare is prescribed. I am saying no, and the boring philology is part of the reason for the no."

by Jonathan Steele ,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/14/post155

 

So we Americans can whine (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) moan groan and complain and lament about 3,000 people lost on 911 but Israel and the Jews can't do the same about the ONE MILLION people lost because of a facist dictator's dreams of an All Syran race?

Pray tell what is the difference?

I personally don't see Israel playing the victim card at all. I see Israel willing to do what it has to do, if push comes to shove, to keep their country, their religion and their way of life intact.

And if it was some Iranian leader who had said this about America...would everyone on this board be so p.hucking blase and throw around the victim card or would we all be up in arms and mad as hell? Even if it wasn't said he "wanted to wipe America off the face of t he earth" or merely said "America was a cancer that needs to be removed"...I truly believe most Americans would be mad as hell and ready to do battle with the pissant that said that about us!

And as a note: I read on this board about people saying things about other races and they're called racists but still people can make remarks about Jews and nothing is said about their bigotry. Have we truly come such a short way from the 1400's and 1500's and the 1940's that Jews are still hated now as they were during those times? If so...what a sad commentary on the growth of the human race.

 

It was 6 million and it was the Aryan race.

 

Marlowe wrote: "Interesting that you should quote the Guardian I recall a later article dated 2006 excuse the C+P - I wouldn't be doing it justice by cherry picking certain paragraphs, beside it's NOT a simple + straightforward as Israel's propagandists/hasbarists have tried to make out..."

I do agree with the very last point. Nor do I dispute that which is established in your article, although others have already done an excellent job refuting the mistranslation of Ahmadinejad's speech. I find that evidence, supporting the contention there has been mistranslations, misinterpretation, misrepresentation and of course all the fabricated hype, to be strong. That said, to contend that there has been no hostility directed at Israel is false! The blatant provocation at those military parades has been rejected here, but merely rejecting evidence refutes NOTHING! From your source:

I agree completely. Militarily, Iran poses NO threat to Israel whatsoever. The mistranslations, the hyped threat, who wins? Actual provocations, who wins? The people clearly divided, who wins?