Israel hails deadly blast in Iran

Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak on Sunday hailed the deadly munitions blast at a base of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards and hoped for more such incidents.
"I don't know the extent of the explosion," he told military radio, asked about the incident. "But it would be desirable if they multiply."
Iran said earlier that a senior general who pioneered an artillery and missile unit was among the 17 Guards reported killed in Saturday's blast at Bid Ganeh, near the town of Malard on the western outskirts of Tehran.
Guards spokesman commander Ramezan Sharif said the blast, which Iran said was an accident, occurred as "ammunition was taken out of the depot and was being moved outside toward the appropriate site."
Set up after the 1979 Islamic revolution to defend Iran, the Guards are in charge of the Islamic republic's missile programme, including Shahab-3 missiles with a range of 2,000 kilometres (1,200 miles) capable of hitting Israel.
Saturday's blast came amid international condemnation of Iran since the release of a new UN nuclear watchdog report accusing Tehran of working towards the development of nuclear warheads to fit inside its medium-range missiles.
Israeli officials have in past weeks warned Iran of the possibility of military strikes against its nuclear sites.
AFP
http://en.irangreenvoice.com/articl...rangreenvoice/En (Iran Green Voice - English)

Barak in damage control after 'Iran gaffe'



created 11/17/2011 - 15:54




Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister, has tried to reassure Israelis about the government's resolve after he appeared to empathise with Iran's alleged nuclear quest during a US television interview.
Barak's suggestion that, were he Iranian, he would "probably" seek the bomb made headlines in Israel, which feels
uniquely threatened by the Islamic republic but has looked to world powers to intervene with tough diplomacy.
Taking time off from a visit to Canada to brief Israel's main radio broadcasters, Barak said on Thursday his remarks in English had been partly misunderstood.
Barak was asked on PBS's Charlie Rose on Wednesday: "If you were them [Iran], wouldn't you want a nuclear weapon?"
"Probably, probably. I know, it's not ... I don't delude myself that they are doing it just because of Israel," he said.
"They look around, they see the Indians are nuclear, the Chinese are nuclear, Pakistan is nuclear ... not to mention the
Russians."
Barak was referring to secretive nuclear programmes in Arab countries like Iraq, in the past, and of Israel itself.
Empathy denied
Questioned about the remarks, Barak denied empathising with the Iranians and said that in the PBS interview he had argued they threatened Middle East stability and safeguards against the spread of nuclear weaponry.
"We cannot allow ourselves to be perceived as the country that sits and whinges and dreads and says, 'They are going to do who-knows-what to us,'" Barak told Israel Radio.
"We must make clear that we understand the matter thoroughly and that this is a challenge to the whole world, because it threatens the whole world."
Recapping, in Hebrew, his response to Rose's question, Barak said it was: "Could be, I don't know".
He gave a similar explanation on Israel's Army Radio, but one commentator fired back by reworking the hypothetical question: "If I were Israeli, I wouldn't want my defence minister saying such things."
The idea that Tehran, which says its atomic programme is to supply its energy needs, might be seeking the bomb for
strategic parity clashes with the fear of many in Israel that they risk an Iranian nuclear Holocaust.
The latter view has been put forward by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, in whose conservative coalition Barak heads the lone centrist party.
Israel has long hinted it could launch last-ditch, preemptive attacks on Iranian atomic facilities.
'Not very optimistic'
Barak also said, in advance of a meeting of the UN nuclear watchdog IAEA, that he was "not very optimistic" about the prospects of strong new sanctions against Iran.
"I'm not very optimistic, there are difficulties in mobilising will in the world. That's why we're working to convince foreign leaders to impose strong and concrete sanctions to stop Iran," he told public radio.
"Today there is an important meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, and we should not appear to be a country that whines, that is afraid, but simply stress that Iran has launched a challenge to the whole world...and the world must move," he said.
The IAEA was expected to discuss passing a new resolution against Iran, after publishing intelligence last week indicating covert military dimensions to its uranium enrichment and other projects.
Iran has dismissed the IAEA report as meaningless and created in a hasty way, saying it is not seeking to create a nuclear programme.
Aljazeera
http://en.irangreenvoice.com/article/2011/nov/17/3374

Evil baby killer is fucking evil.

And the Israelis wonder why shit like this happens:



Ehud Barak/Elmer Fudd is a complete asswipe. With statements like this he puts innocent Israelis at risk, both Jewish and Arabic.
Maybe that's what he wants, more terror attacks means more sympathy, money, and lobbying power from the USA.
Israeli right wing politicians are a very special and cruel breed of evil, and they always reap what they sow.
I'm just happy Ariel Sharon is still a cabbage. He deserves to be among the undead, perhaps reflecting on his butchery of men women and children in deliberate and needless massacres.
[IMAGE]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3106/2729329694_05d255fd76.jpg[/IMAGE]

Iran prides themselves on wanting to wipe Isreal off the face of the map, denies the holocaust and celebrates the bombings and deaths of Isreaites. Whats so different here?

The hardcore Zionists don't mind sacrificing their "fellow" Jews for their Holy Cause. Look at the King David Hotel incident, to name just one.

You are confused, obviously, between a bad translation of a speech made by one man, and feelings of a whole nation.

We sure know who the Zionist apologists are, here. They come right out and play their Holocaust violin ensemble.

Please give us a better translation, or if you feel I've misquoted him please correct me.

Denial of a lie is not a crime, last I checked.

As for Israel, they're the neighbourhood bully. You figure it out.

I'm not accusing you of any crime.

I'm just asking that, if you feel the popular translations of 'محمود احمدی‌نژاد's speech misrepresent his position
or the position of Iran, please provide a better one.

If you don't, or can't, most people will continue to believe the translation they have, no matter how poor.

Here.

I apologise for the length, but there is no "TL;DR" version of such:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm

Does Iran's President Want Israel Wiped Off The Map - Does He Deny The 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 löschen') - 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-Böll-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." (Jörg Pfuhl, ARD radio studio Istanbul 2006-01-11) But - all this does not count if the Head of a state is stigmatized as Hitler.

BTW, Ahmad-i-nejad does not give the final orders in Iran, just so we have it straight.

This would be like Iran worrying about what John Bolton says.

Except that John Bolton is not the President of the United States.

Are you saying Ahmad-i-nejad is a minor, forgotten opposition figure with no standing whatsoever in the current government? Does anyone speak for the Iranian people, or their government?

And since there's no tl;dr the shortest possible translation of

goes on for 4 rambling copy-pasta posts?

You're forgetting though that the explosion in Iran was at an army base. Soldiers are legitimate targets under the Geneva convention. Civilians [such as those that were on this bus] are not and are deemed &quot;protected persons&quot;. I see no comparison. Having said that - Barak is a fucking stupid drawf and I can't believe he dared to show his face again in the Israeli politics after the 1999 elections fiasco.

The explosion last weekend in Iran that killed 17 members of the armed forces, including a founder of the country’s missile program, occurred while researchers were working on weapons capable of delivering Israel a “strong punch in the mouth” and disrupted their project by a few days, the Iranian military chief of staff said Wednesday.
The remarks by the chief of staff, Hassan Firouzabadi, represented the first time that an Iranian official had offered any detail on the nature of the work at the military base where the explosion took place. The commander’s remarks also went beyond earlier descriptions of the impact of the damage.
The net effect seemed to deepen, rather than clarify, the questions behind the explosion at the base in Bidganeh, about 25 miles from Tehran, which Iranian authorities have insisted was an accident. The force of the blast was so enormous that it shook windows in many surrounding towns, according to Iranian news sites and witnesses.
Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, regarded as an important figure in Iran’s efforts to construct long-range missiles, was killed in the explosion, as were 16 fellow members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
It came against a backdrop of rising tension with Iran’s adversaries, notably Israel and the United States, over the Iranian nuclear program, which Western nations suspect is meant for military use despite Iran’s denials. There was immediate speculation that Israeli saboteurs were responsible for the blast, which Israeli officials did not go out of their way to dispute. On the contrary, some Israeli leaders regarded the explosion as good news. Defense Minister Ehud Barak said “it would be desirable if they multiply,” although he also said he did not know who or what was responsible.
“This recent event and explosion had no relation to either Israel or America,” the Iranian chief of staff was quoted as saying by the Iran Students’ News Agency. “Except for the fact that the product of the research done at this facility would have delivered a strong punch in the mouth of Israel and its occupying regime.”
He was further quoted as saying “that research will have a short-term delay of a few days, but definitely the forces and compatriots of Martyr Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam will continue on that path and the product of his life’s efforts will be a punch in the mouth of Israel.”
General Moghaddam was thought to be personally close to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, who presided over a vast state funeral for the victims on Monday. Ayatollah Khamenei issued a second condolence on Wednesday in what appeared to reflect his own acute grief at the loss.
“The bloody martyrdom of the honorable I.R.G.C. commander and unassuming scientist Tehrani Moghaddam was a bitter event for us,” the leader was quoted as saying by the Islamic Republic News Agency.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/w...emain-a-mystery.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

Artin Afkhami contributed reporting from Boston.

Is war declared?

I get that as a military facility, and of course attended by a commander who headed up the nuclear programme, it is a viable target in times of aggression.

I might add that the only emotion I personally felt was one of relief.
I've no doubt Hassan Tehrani Moqaddam was nothing less than evil, given his rumoured associations in China and North Korea in dealing with weapons grade nuclear material.

But Iran has allowed repeated inspections of its nuclear facilities. Israel has not.
Iran signed a non-proliferation treaty. Israel has not.

If I had to bet which of the evil fucks in charge of the big red button marked LAUNCH NUKES I would bet on the finger pressing that button to be of an Israeli rather than a Persian.

Fuck you, I don't read Arabic.

Amen:

THE THIRD TEMPLE'S HOLY OF HOLIES:
ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army

I see that a lot of people died and suffered, so to me that makes it comparable.

I think it's really lousy that civilians in Iran are being squeezed to death by warmongering leaders,
and that soldiers are being blown up by either Israeli spies, or the stupidity of their warmongering leaders.

I also think its really lousy that civilians in Israel are being squeezed by their own idiot warmongering leaders,
and that they are being blown up by "civilians-who-think-they-are-secret-agents" that are being tricked into the game by other idiots.

Blowing up soldiers may be a legitimate tactic under Geneva,
but tormenting civilians (as the Supreme Leader does in Iran, and Netanyahu does in Israel) also appears to be legitimate.

I do not think that this is a fun game.

He's in it for the lulz. just look
"Defense Minister" means that he's a big man. Almost as big as Bibi.

Then how do you KNOW it's Arabic?

then how do you know that "wipe Israel off the face of the map" is a bad translation?
What was the President of Iran actually saying?

/facepalm

Bullshit. Israel has had the nukes already during the Yom Kipur war. Israel was hurt bad during that war and was near its destruction. Did it push the red button? Nope.
So what if Iran signed a non-proliferation treaty? Ribentrop signed a treaty of non-aggression with Russia know as Ribentrop-Molotov. Did the nazi Germany follow through with the treaty? I think you know the answer to that.

All of your are discussing useless news. Today something new came about about Israel's plan to attack Iran:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4149819,00.html
Current and former US intelligence officials estimate that any Israeli attack on nuclear sites in Iran would go far beyond airstrikes from F-15 and F-16 fighter jets and likely include electronic warfare against the Islamic Republic's electric grid, Internet, cell phone network, and emergency frequencies for firemen and police officers.

The officials, who based their assessment on a US intelligence report published last summer, told the Daily Beast news website that Israel has been assembling a multibillion-dollar array of high-tech weapons that would allow it to jam, blind, and deafen Tehran's defenses in the case of a pre-emptive aerial strike.

And don't forget, that Israel didn't bomb Iran when it was about to deploy it's nuclear reactor. It just sent a sophisticated virus.

Let's be clear - if Israel used it's massive nuke arsenal that it has tried to cover up and were it not for the bravery of Mordechai Vanunu might have gotten away with, it's WW3 time.

China will be pissed off. And the USA can't do shit about China. They run this.

Oh, please. Mordechai Vanunu, the semi-literate taxi driver and night guard of the facility. Israel needed somebody to disclose the fact that it had nukes, but didn't want to admit it directly. That idiot fell right into the trap. I know it sounds sexy to think of him as a big hero for peace, but have you ever heard him talk? The man can't put two sentences together.
As for the amount of nukes israel has - it was the French that gave the nukes to Israel, i.e. they know how much Israel has, and so do the other Western countries.

They worked harder than a Scientologist to make sure he was kept quiet. It did not work. Taxi driver or not, he spent 18 years jailed, 11 of them in solitary.

He smuggled a camera into the facility and secretly took 57 photographs, selling them to a British newspaper. You think this was all by design??

"Israel needed somebody to disclose the fact that it had nukes, but didn't want to admit it directly." LOLWUT?? This makes zero sense.

I'm disappointed that you swallow all that propaganda. I suppose Ariel Sharon and the Phalangist militia didn't really kill babies and kids and women in Sabra & Shatila massacres then?

Bozuri - do you disagree with Vanunu's principles?

"I am neither a traitor nor a spy, I only wanted the world to know what was happening."
He also said, "We don't need a Jewish state. There needs to be a Palestinian state. Jews can, and have lived anywhere, so a Jewish State is not necessary."
"Vanunu is a difficult and complex person. He remains stubbornly, admirably uncompromisingly true to his principles, is willing to pay the price", said Ha'aretz newspaper in 2008.[

^^^^ I'm just not impressed or convinced by Vanunu. Not at all. I think the guy is an idiot, who now, after having spent time in prison kind of has to play the role of this big peace maker. His pride would never let him admit that he is just a fool who couldn't care less about Israeli nukes and got sucked into a game of spying which was totally out of his league. Each time I see interviews with him, whether in Hebrew or English, I just can't shake the feeling that he is a retard. I don't mean it in a metaphorical way. I mean literally a retard. Forrest Gump style. And if he cares about peace so much, why did he need to sell the photographs, rather than just give them away?
As for the nukes - again, they were given to Israel by the French. Do you really think that the Western intelligence agencies didn't know what they gave Israel? Pleeeease.

What's the point of having nukes if nobody knows it? The only point of having nukes is their deterrent effect. If you have to use them you lost the game. I still don't think they wanted it let out the way Vanunu did, at least not until they had more. They would still eventually "accidentally" have let it out had Vanunu not blown the whistle.

Yup, I totally disagree. I am Israeli and we do need a Jewish state. Also, let me repeat again - my personal impression of him is that he had no principles when he took those photos. It took him one month to decide what to do with them and then he decided to sell them. I think right now, having suffered in solitary and having gotten the attention of the world as this supposed big hero, he just plays along and it flatters him that he is held in high regard abroad. But I stand by my opinion - the man is not the brightest cookie in the jar and simply got sucked into a spy game. Pffff.....to go on vacation to Italy with an attractive blond he's just met and who was clearly out of his league. Yeah....smart move Vanunu.

I don't share your opinion of him. I think anyone who suffered inhuman torture for 18 years at the hands of his jailers might have difficulty with speech.

I think in fact his statement to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee contradicts your opinion of him.

In March 2009 Vanunu wrote:
I am asking the committee to remove my name from the list for this year’s list of nominations. I cannot be part of a list of laureates that includes Shimon Peres, the President of Israel.
He is the man who was behind all the Israeli atomic policy.
Peres established and developed the atomic weapon program in Dimona in Israel.
Peres was the man who ordered the kidnapping of me in Italy Rome, Sept. 30, 1986, and for the secret trial and sentencing of me as a spy and traitor for 18 years in isolation in prison in Israel. Until now he continues to oppose my freedom and release, in spite of my serving full sentence 18 years.
From all these reasons I don’t want be nominated and will not accept this nomination.
I say No to any nomination as long as I am not free, that is, as long as I am still forced to be in Israel.
What I want is freedom and only freedom

Unless you believe the Israeli nuclear industry is happy to hire "retards" as shift managers at their nuclear plants, and train them, then I think you are very mistaken.

After a lengthy interview with the facility's security officer, he was accepted for training, and was put through an intensive course in physics, chemistry, mathematics, and English.
He did sufficiently well to be accepted, and was employed as a nuclear plant technician and shift manager in February 1977.

Exactly. Israel needed its enemies to know it had nukes. But it never wanted to admit to it publically. Maybe you're right, maybe it didn't lead Vanunu into the trap, but it surely ain't sorry that the secret is out.

Classic Mossad honey-trap operation. Plenty have fallen for it before.

Do you think the Palestinians should also have their own state, if Israel has a right to keep theirs?

Look, you and I are not likely to agree. My impressions of Vanunu are just those - impressions. Each time I see him on TV I can't shake the feeling that he is a simple, uneducated man, who speaks empty slogans which are popular at that moment because he thniks they will please his audience. I never heard anything smart or coherent come out of his mouth. He is not an intellectual by any stretch of imagination. His supposed statement - I doubt he is the one that wrote it. He is a symbol of the left wing movement right now and is pretty much being handled. There are tons of people behind him that would write that shit for him.