Ahmadinejad's thoughts on israel
i'm reading an article by Virginia TILLEY, titled "Putting Words in Ahmadinejad's Mouth"
Johannesburg, South Africa
this is only an excerpt.
"For months, scholars like Cole and journalists like the London Guardian's Jonathan Steele have been pointing out these mistranslations while more and more appear: for example, Mr. Ahmadinejad's comments at the Organization of Islamic Countries meeting on August 3, 2006. Radio Free Europe reported that he said 'that the 'main cure' for crisis in the Middle East is the elimination of Israel.' 'Elimination of Israel' implies physical destruction: bombs, strafing, terror, throwing Jews into the sea. Tony Blair denounced the translated statement as 'quite shocking'. But Mr Ahmadinejad never said this. According to al-Jazeera, what he actually said was 'The real cure for the conflict is the elimination of the Zionist regime, but there should be an immediate ceasefire first.'
Nafarious agendas are evident in consistently translating 'eliminating the occupation regime' as 'destruction of Israel'. 'Regime' refers to governance, not populations or cities. 'Zionist regime' is the government of Israel and its system of laws, which have annexed Palestinian land and hold millions of Palestinians under military occupation. Many mainstream human rights activists believe that Israel's 'regime' must indeed be transformed, although they disagree how. Some hope that Israel can be redeemed by a change of philosophy and government (regime) that would allow a two-state solution. Others believe that Jewish statehood itself is inherently unjust, as it embeds racist principles into state governance, and call for its transformation into a secular democracy (change of regime). None of these ideas about regime change signifies the expulsion of jews into the sea or the ravaging of their towns and cities. All signify profound political change, necessary to creating a just peace.
Mr. Ahmadinejad made other statements at the Organization of Islamic Countries that clearly indicated his understanding that Israel must be treated within the framework of international law. For instance, he recognized the reality of present borders when he said that 'any aggressor should go back to the Lebanese international border'. He recognized the authority of Israel and the role of diplomacy in observing, 'The circumstances should be prepared for the return of the refugees and displaced people, and prisoners should be exchanged.' He also called for a boycott: 'We also propose that the Islamic nations immediately cut all their overt and covert political and economic relations with the Zionist region.' A double bushel of major Jewish peace groups, US church groups, and hordes of human rights organizations have said the same things.
A final word is due about Mr. Ahmadinejad's 'Holocaust denial'. Holocaust denial is a very sensitive issue in the West, where it notoriously serves anti-Semitism. Elsewhere in the world, however, fogginess about the Holocaust traces more to a sheer lack of information. One might think there is plenty of information about the Holocaust worldwide, but this is a mistake. (Lest we be snooty, Americans show the same startling insularity from general knowledge when, for example, they live to late adulthood still not grasping that US forces killed at least two million Vietnamese and believing that anyone who says so is anti-American. Most French people have not yet accepted that their army slaughtered a million Arabs in Algeria.)
Skepticism about the Holocaust narrative has started to take hold in the Middle East not because people hate Jews but because that narrative is deployed to argue that Israel has a right to 'defend itself' by attacking every country in its vicinity. Middle East publics are so used to western canards legitimizing colonial or imperial takeovers that some wonder if the six-million-dead argument is just another myth or exaggerated tale. It is dismal that Mr. Ahmadinejad seems to belong to this ill-educated sector, but he has never been known for his higher education.
Still, Mr. Ahmadinejad did not say what the US Subcommittee on Intelligence Policy reported that he said: 'They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets.' He actually said, 'In the name of the Holocaust they have created a myth and regard it to be worthier than God, religion and the prophets.' This language targets the myth of the Holocaust, not the Holocaust itself - i.e. 'myth' as 'mystique', or what has been done with the Holocaust. Other writers, including important Jewish theologians, have criticized the 'cult' or 'ghost' of the Holocaust without denying that it happened. In any case, Mr. Ahmadinejad's main message has been that, if the Holocaust happened as Europe says it did, then Europe, and not the Muslim world, is responsible for it."
Johannesburg, South Africa
this is only an excerpt.
"For months, scholars like Cole and journalists like the London Guardian's Jonathan Steele have been pointing out these mistranslations while more and more appear: for example, Mr. Ahmadinejad's comments at the Organization of Islamic Countries meeting on August 3, 2006. Radio Free Europe reported that he said 'that the 'main cure' for crisis in the Middle East is the elimination of Israel.' 'Elimination of Israel' implies physical destruction: bombs, strafing, terror, throwing Jews into the sea. Tony Blair denounced the translated statement as 'quite shocking'. But Mr Ahmadinejad never said this. According to al-Jazeera, what he actually said was 'The real cure for the conflict is the elimination of the Zionist regime, but there should be an immediate ceasefire first.'
Nafarious agendas are evident in consistently translating 'eliminating the occupation regime' as 'destruction of Israel'. 'Regime' refers to governance, not populations or cities. 'Zionist regime' is the government of Israel and its system of laws, which have annexed Palestinian land and hold millions of Palestinians under military occupation. Many mainstream human rights activists believe that Israel's 'regime' must indeed be transformed, although they disagree how. Some hope that Israel can be redeemed by a change of philosophy and government (regime) that would allow a two-state solution. Others believe that Jewish statehood itself is inherently unjust, as it embeds racist principles into state governance, and call for its transformation into a secular democracy (change of regime). None of these ideas about regime change signifies the expulsion of jews into the sea or the ravaging of their towns and cities. All signify profound political change, necessary to creating a just peace.
Mr. Ahmadinejad made other statements at the Organization of Islamic Countries that clearly indicated his understanding that Israel must be treated within the framework of international law. For instance, he recognized the reality of present borders when he said that 'any aggressor should go back to the Lebanese international border'. He recognized the authority of Israel and the role of diplomacy in observing, 'The circumstances should be prepared for the return of the refugees and displaced people, and prisoners should be exchanged.' He also called for a boycott: 'We also propose that the Islamic nations immediately cut all their overt and covert political and economic relations with the Zionist region.' A double bushel of major Jewish peace groups, US church groups, and hordes of human rights organizations have said the same things.
A final word is due about Mr. Ahmadinejad's 'Holocaust denial'. Holocaust denial is a very sensitive issue in the West, where it notoriously serves anti-Semitism. Elsewhere in the world, however, fogginess about the Holocaust traces more to a sheer lack of information. One might think there is plenty of information about the Holocaust worldwide, but this is a mistake. (Lest we be snooty, Americans show the same startling insularity from general knowledge when, for example, they live to late adulthood still not grasping that US forces killed at least two million Vietnamese and believing that anyone who says so is anti-American. Most French people have not yet accepted that their army slaughtered a million Arabs in Algeria.)
Skepticism about the Holocaust narrative has started to take hold in the Middle East not because people hate Jews but because that narrative is deployed to argue that Israel has a right to 'defend itself' by attacking every country in its vicinity. Middle East publics are so used to western canards legitimizing colonial or imperial takeovers that some wonder if the six-million-dead argument is just another myth or exaggerated tale. It is dismal that Mr. Ahmadinejad seems to belong to this ill-educated sector, but he has never been known for his higher education.
Still, Mr. Ahmadinejad did not say what the US Subcommittee on Intelligence Policy reported that he said: 'They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets.' He actually said, 'In the name of the Holocaust they have created a myth and regard it to be worthier than God, religion and the prophets.' This language targets the myth of the Holocaust, not the Holocaust itself - i.e. 'myth' as 'mystique', or what has been done with the Holocaust. Other writers, including important Jewish theologians, have criticized the 'cult' or 'ghost' of the Holocaust without denying that it happened. In any case, Mr. Ahmadinejad's main message has been that, if the Holocaust happened as Europe says it did, then Europe, and not the Muslim world, is responsible for it."