Does Iran's President Want Israel Wiped Off The Map - Does He Deny The Holocaust?
VIVA PALESTINE
Holocaust?
An analysis of media rhetoric on its way to war against Iran - Commenting on
the alleged statements of Iran's President Ahmadinejad .
By Anneliese Fikentscher and Andreas Neumann
Translation to English: Erik Appleby
04/19/06 "Kein Krieg!" -- -- - "But now that I'm on Iran, the threat to
Iran, of course -- (applause) -- the threat from Iran is, of course, their
stated objective to destroy our strong ally Israel. That's a threat, a
serious threat. It's a threat to world peace; it's a threat, in essence, to
a strong alliance. I made it clear, I'll make it clear again, that we will
use military might to protect our ally, Israel, and -- (applause.)" George
W. Bush, US-President, 2006-03-20 in Cleveland (Ohio) in an off-the-cuff
speech (source: www.whitehouse.gov) But why does Bush speak of Iran's
objective to destroy Israel?
Does Iran's President wants Israel wiped off the map?
To raze Israel to the ground, to batter down, to destroy, to annihilate, to
liquidate, to erase Israel, to wipe it off the map - this is what Iran's
President demanded - at least this is what we read about or heard of at the
end of October 2005. Spreading the news was very effective. This is a
declaration of war they said. Obviously government and media were at one
with their indignation. It goes around the world.
But let's take a closer look at what Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
said. It is a merit of the 'New York Times' that they placed the complete
speech at our disposal. Here's an excerpt from the publication dated
2005-10-30:
"They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and
Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan. Let's take a
step back. [[[We had a hostile regime in this country which was
undemocratic, armed to the teeth and, with SAVAK, its security apparatus of
SAVAK [the intelligence bureau of the Shah of Iran's government] watched
everyone. An environment of terror existed.]]] When our dear Imam [Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Iranian revolution] said that the
regime must be removed, many of those who claimed to be politically
well-informed said it was not possible. All the corrupt governments were in
support of the regime when Imam Khomeini started his movement. [[[All the
Western and Eastern countries supported the regime even after the massacre
of September 7 [1978] ]]] and said the removal of the regime was not
possible. But our people resisted and it is 27 years now that we have
survived without a regime dependent on the United States. The tyranny of the
East and the West over the world should have to end, but weak people who can
see only what lies in front of them cannot believe this. Who would believe
that one day we could witness the collapse of the Eastern Empire? But we
could watch its fall in our lifetime. And it collapsed in a way that we have
to refer to libraries because no trace of it is left. Imam [Khomeini] said
Saddam must go and he said he would grow weaker than anyone could imagine.
Now you see the man who spoke with such arrogance ten years ago that one
would have thought he was immortal, is being tried in his own country in
handcuffs and shackles [[[by those who he believed supported him and with
whose backing he committed his crimes]]]. Our dear Imam said that the
occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise
statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible
to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat
and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact,
signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of
the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no
doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in
the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the
Islamic world."
(source: www.nytimes.com, based on a publication of 'Iranian Students News
Agency' (ISNA) -- insertions by the New York Times in squared brackets --
passages in triple squared brackets will be left blank in the MEMRI version
printed below)
It's becoming clear. The statements of the Iranian President have been
reflected by the media in a manipulated way. Iran's President betokens the
removal of the regimes, that are in power in Israel and in the USA, to be
possible aim for the future. This is correct. But he never demands the
elimination or annihilation of Israel. He reveals that changes are
potential. The Shah-Regime being supported by the USA in its own country has
been vanquished. The eastern governance of the Soviet Union collapsed.
Saddam Hussein's dominion drew to a close. Referring to this he voices his
aspiration that changes will also be feasible in Israel respectively in
Palestine. He adduces Ayatollah Khomeini referring to the Shah-Regime who in
this context said that the regime (meaning the Shah-Regime) should be
removed.
Certainly, Ahmadinejad translates this quotation about a change of regime
into the occupied Palestine. This has to be legitimate. To long for modified
political conditions in a country is a world-wide day-to-day business by all
means. But to commute a demand for removal of a 'regime' into a demand for
removal of a state is serious deception and dangerous demagogy.
This is one chapter of the war against Iran that has already begun with the
words of Georg Meggle, professor of philosophy at the university of
Leipzig - namely with the probably most important phase, the phase of
propaganda.
Marginally we want to mention that it was the former US Vice-Minister of
Defence and current President of the World Bank, Paul D. Wolfowitz, who in
Sept. 2001 talked about ending states in public and without any kind of awe.
And it was the father of George W. Bush who started the discussion about a
winnable nuclear war if only the survival of an elite is assured.
Let's pick an example: the German online-news-magazine tagesschau.de writes
the following about Iran's president on 2005-10-27: "There is no doubt: the
new wave of assaults in Palestine will erase the stigma in countenance of
the Islamic world." Instead of using the original word 'wave' they write
'wave of assaults'. This replacement of the original text is what we call
disinformation. E.g. it would be correct to say: "The new movement in
Palestine will erase the stain of disgrace from the Islamic world."
Additionally this statement refers to the occupation regime mentioned in the
previous sentence.
As a precaution we will examine a different translation of the speech - a
version prepared by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI),
located in Washington:
"They [ask]: 'Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and
Zionism?' But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are
attainable, and surely can be achieved. [[[...]]] "'When the dear Imam
[Khomeini] said that [the Shah's] regime must go, and that we demand a world
without dependent governments, many people who claimed to have political and
other knowledge [asked], 'Is it possible [that the Shah's regime can be
toppled]?' That day, when Imam [Khomeini] began his movement, all the powers
supported [the Shah's] corrupt regime [[[...]]] and said it was not
possible. However, our nation stood firm, and by now we have, for 27 years,
been living without a government dependent on America. Imam [Khomeni] said:
'The rule of the East [U.S.S.R.] and of the West [U.S.] should be ended.'
But the weak people who saw only the tiny world near them did not believe
it. Nobody believed that we would one day witness the collapse of the
Eastern Imperialism [i.e. the U.S.S.R], and said it was an iron regime. But
in our short lifetime we have witnessed how this regime collapsed in such a
way that we must look for it in libraries, and we can find no literature
about it. Imam [Khomeini] said that Saddam [Hussein] must go, and that he
would be humiliated in a way that was unprecedented. And what do you see
today? A man who, 10 years ago, spoke as proudly as if he would live for
eternity is today chained by the feet, and is now being tried in his own
country [[[...]]] Imam [Khomeini] said: 'This regime that is occupying Qods
[Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.' This sentence is
very wise. The issue of Palestine is not an issue on which we can
compromise. Is it possible that an [Islamic] front allows another front
[i.e. country] to arise in its [own] heart? This means defeat, and he who
accepts the existence of this regime [i.e. Israel] in fact signs the defeat
of the Islamic world. In his battle against the World of Arrogance, our dear
Imam [Khomeini] set the regime occupying Qods [Jerusalem] as the target of
his fight. I do not doubt that the new wave which has begun in our dear
Palestine and which today we are also witnessing in the Islamic world is a
wave of morality which has spread all over the Islamic world. Very soon,
this stain of disgrace [i.e. Israel] will vanish from the center of the
Islamic world - and this is attainable."
(source: http://memri.org, based on the publication of 'Iranian Students
News Agency' (ISNA) -- insertions by MEMRI in squared brackets -- missing
passages compared to the 'New York Times' in triple squared brackets)
The term 'map' to which the media refer at length does not even appear.
Whereas the 'New York Times' said: "Our dear Imam said that the occupying
regime must be wiped off the map" the version by MEMRI is: "Imam [Khomeini]
said: This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from
the pages of history."
MEMRI added the following prefixed formulation to their translation as a
kind of title: "Very Soon, This Stain of Disgrace [i.e. Israel] Will Be
Purged From the Center of the Islamic World - and This is Attainable".
Thereby they take it out of context by using the insertion 'i.e. Israel'
they distort the meaning on purpose. The temporal tapering 'very soon' does
not appear in the NY-Times-translation either. Besides it is striking that
MEMRI deleted all passages in their translation which characterize the
US-supported Shah-Regime as a regime of terror and at the same time show the
true character of US-American policy.
An independent translation of the original (like the version published by
ISNA) yields that Ahmadinejad does not use the term 'map'. He quotes
Ayatollah Khomeini's assertion that the occupation regime must vanish from
this world - literally translated: from the arena of times. Correspondingly:
there is no space for an occupation regime in this world respectively in
this time. The formulation 'wipe off the map' used by the 'New York Times'
is a very free and aggravating interpretation which is equivalent to 'razing
something to the ground' or 'annihilating something'. The downwelling
translation, first into English ('wipe off the map'), then from English to
German - and all literally ('von der Landkarte l?schen') - makes us stride
away from the original more and more. The perfidious thing about this
translation is that the expression 'map' can only be used in one
(intentional) way: a state can be removed from a map but not a regime, about
which Ahmadinejad is actually speaking.
Again following the independent translation: "I have no doubt that the new
movement taking place in our dear Palestine is a spiritual movement which is
spanning the entire Islamic world and which will soon remove this stain of
disgrace from the Islamic world".
It must be allowed to ask how it is possible that 'spirtual movement' resp.
'wave of morality' (as translated by MEMRI) and 'wave of assaults' can be
equated and translated (like e.g tagesschau.de published it).
Does Iran's President deny the Holocaust?
"The German government condemned the repetitive offending anti-Israel
statements by Ahmadinejad to be shocking. Such behaviour is not tolerable,
Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier stated. [...] Federal Chancellor
Angela Merkel proclaimed Ahmadinejad's statements to be 'inconceivable'"
(published by tagesschau.de 2005-12-14.
But not only the German Foreign Minister Steinmeier and the Federal
Chancellor Merkel allege this, but the Bild-Zeitung, tagesschau.de, parts of
the peace movement, US-President George W. Bush, the 'Papers for German and
international politics', CNN, the Heinrich-B?ll-Foundation, almost the
entire world does so, too: Iran's President Ahmadinejad denies the
Holocaust.
What is this assertion based on? In substance it is based on dispatches of 2
days - 2005-12-14 and 2006-02-11.
"The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks
against Israel and the Western states and has denied the Holocaust. Instead
of making Israel's attacks against Palestine a subject of discussion 'the
Western states devote their energy to the fairy-tale of the massacre against
the Jews', Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday in a speech at Zahedan in the
south-east of Iran which was broadcasted directly by the news-channel
Khabar. That day he stated that if the Western states really believe in the
assassination of six million Jews in W.W. II they should put a piece of land
in Europe, in the USA, Canada or Alaska at Israel's disposal." - dispatch of
the German press agency DPA, 2005-12-14.
The German TV-station n24 spreads the following on 2006-12-14 using the
title 'Iran's President calls the Holocaust a myth': "The Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and
called the Holocaust a 'myth' used as a pretext by the Europeans to found a
Jewish state in the center of the Islamic world . 'In the name of the
Holocaust they have created a myth and regard it to be worthier than God,
religion and the prophets' the Iranian head of state said."
The Iranian press agency IRNA renders Ahmadinejad on 2005-12-14 as follows:
"'If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have
killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which
seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and
imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the
crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are
committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets,
missiles and sanctions.' [...] 'If you have committed the crimes so give a
piece of your land somewhere in Europe or America and Canada or Alaska to
them to set up their own state there.' [...] Ahmadinejad said some have
created a myth on holocaust and hold it even higher than the very belief in
religion and prophets [...] The president further said, 'If your
civilization consists of aggression, displacing the oppressed nations,
suppressing justice-seeking voices and spreading injustice and poverty for
the majority of people on the earth, then we say it out loud that we despise
your hollow civilization.'"
There again we find the quotation already rendered by n24: "In the name of
the Holocaust they created a myth." We can see that this is completely
different from what is published by e.g. the DPA - the massacre against the
Jews is a fairy-tale. What Ahmadinejad does is not denying the Holocaust.
No! It is dealing out criticism against the mendacity of the imperialistic
powers who use the Holocaust to muzzle critical voices and to achieve
advantages concerning the legitimization of a planned war. This is criticism
against the exploitation of the Holocaust.
CNN (2005-12-15) renders as follows: "If you have burned the Jews why don't
you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel.
Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the
innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?"
The Washingtonian ''Middle East Media Research Institute' (MEMRI) renders
Ahmadinejad's statements from 2005-12-14 as follows: "...we ask you: if you
indeed committed this great crime, why should the oppressed people of
Palestine be punished for it? * [...] If you committed a crime, you
yourselves should pay for it. Our offer was and remains as follows: If you
committed a crime, it is only appropriate that you place a piece of your
land at their disposal - a piece of Europe, of America, of Canada, or of
Alaska - so they can establish their own state. Rest assured that if you do
so, the Iranian people will voice no objection."
The MEMRI-rendering uses the relieving translation 'great crime' and
misappropriates the following sentence at the * marked passage: "Why have
they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes
against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and
sanctions." This sentence has obviously been left out deliberately because
it would intimate why the Israeli state could have forfeited the right to
establish itself in Palestine - videlicet because of its aggressive
expansionist policy against the people of Palestine, ignoring any law of
nations and disobeying all UN-resolutions.
In spite of the variability referring to the rendering of the statements of
Iran's President we should nevertheless note down: the reproach of denying
the Holocaust cannot be sustained if Ahmadinejad speaks of a great and huge
crime that has been done to the Jews.
In another IRNA-dispatch (2005-12-14) the Arabian author Ghazi Abu Daqa
writes about Ahmadinejad: "The Iranian president has nothing against the
followers of Judaism [...] Ahmadinejad is against Zionism as well as its
expansionist and occupying policy. That is why he managed to declare to the
world with courage that there is no place for the Zionist regime in the
world civilized community."
It's no wonder that such opinions do not go down particularly well with the
ideas of the centers of power in the Western world. But for this reason they
are not wrong right away. Dealing out criticism against the aggressive
policy of the Western world, to which Israel belongs as well, is not yet
anti-Semitism. We should at least to give audience to this kind of
criticism - even if it is a problematic field for us.
2006-02-11 Ahmadinejad said according to IRNA: "[...] the real holocaust
should be sought in Palestine, where the blood of the oppressed nation is
shed every day and Iraq, where the defenceless Muslim people are killed
daily. [...] 'Some western governments, in particular the US, approve of the
sacrilege on the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), while denial of the >Myth of
Holocaust<, based on which the Zionists have been exerting pressure upon
other countries for the past 60 years and kill the innocent Palestinians, is
considered as a crime' [...]"
The assertion that Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust thus is wrong in more
than one aspect. He does not deny the Holocaust, but speaks of denial
itself. And he does not speak of denial of the Holocaust, but of denial of
the Myth of Holocaust. This is something totally different. All in all he
speaks of the exploitation of the Holocaust. The Myth of Holocaust, like it
is made a subject of discussion by Ahmadinejad, is a myth that has been
built up in conjunction with the Holocaust to - as he says - put pressure
onto somebody. We might follow this train of thoughts or we might not. But
we cannot equalize his thoughts with denial of the Holocaust.
If Ahmadinejad according to this 2006-02-11 condemns the fact that it is
forbidden and treated as a crime to do research into the Myth of Holocaust,
as we find it quoted in the MEMRI translation, this acquires a meaning much
different from the common and wide-spread one. If the myth related to the
Holocaust is commuted to a 'Fairy Tale of the Massacre' - like the DPA
did - this can only be understood as a malicious misinterpretation.
By the use of misrepresentation and adulteration it apparently succeeded to
constitute the statements of the Iranian President to be part and parcel of
the currently fought propaganda battle. It is our responsibility to counter
this.
Concluding:
A dispatch by Reuters confirms 2006-02-21: "The Iranian Foreign Minister
Manuchehr Mottaki has [...] repudiated that his state would want the Jewish
state Israel 'wiped off the map'. [...] Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
had been misunderstood. 'Nobody can erase a country from the map.'
Ahmadinejad was not thinking of the state of Israel but of their regime
[...]. 'We do not accredit this regime to be legitimate.' [...] Mottaki also
accepted that the Holocaust really took place in a way that six million Jews
were murdered during the era of National Socialism."
The next step is to connect the Iranian President with Hitler. 2006-02-20
the Chairman of the Counsil of Jews in France (Crif) says in Paris: "The
Iranian President's assertions do not rank behind Hitler's 'Mein Kampf'".
Paul Spiegel, President of the Central Counsil of Jews in Germany,
2005-12-10 in the 'Welt' qualifies the statements of Ahmadinejad to be "the
worst comment on this subject that he has ever heard of a statesman since A.
Hitler". At the White House the Iranian President is even named Hitler. And
the German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel as well moves over Iran's
President towards Hitler and National Socialism by saying 2006-02-04 in
Munich: "Already in the early 1930's many people said that it is only
rhetoric. One could have prevented a lot in time if one had acted... Germany
is in the debt to resist the incipiencies and to do anything to make clear
where the limit of tolerance is. Iran remains in control of the situation,
it is still in their hands."
All this indicates war. Slobodan Milosevic became Hitler. The result was the
war of the Nato against Yugoslavia. Saddam Hussein became Hitler. What
followed was the war the USA and their coalition of compliant partners waged
against Iraq. Now the Iranian President becomes Hitler.
And someone who is Hitler-like can assure a hundred times that he only wants
to use nuclear energy in a peaceful way. Nobody will believe him. Somebody
like Hitler can act within the scope of all contracts. Acting contrary to
contract will nevertheless be imputed to him. "Virtually none of the Western
states recognize that uranium enrichment is absolutely legal. There is no
restriction by contract or by the law of nations. Quite the contrary:
Actually the Western countries would have the duty to assist Iran with these
activities, according to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. As long as a state
renounces the bomb it is eligible for technical support by the nuclear
powers." (J?rg Pfuhl, ARD radio studio Istanbul 2006-01-11) But - all this
does not count if the Head of a state is stigmatized as Hitler.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm
url:http://www.myreader.co.uk/gp/1265-1.aspx
