Yeah??? well I have friends who were present at the time and videotaped the whole speech and they will tell you exactly what he said. And play the videotape to prove you wrong.
Oh here they come now.
First the lie as it is generally presented. False claims about what was said.
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
According to Farsi-language expert Juan Cole, and even right-wing services like MEMRI, the correct translation of what Ahmadinejad said is:
"The Imam said that this regime that is occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
Ahmadinejad was being prophetic, not threatening. He was citing Imam Khomeini, who said this line in the 1980s (a period when Israel was still selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as a ghastly threat then).
In his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad had just reminded his audience that the Shah's regime, the Soviet Union, and Saddam Hussein had all, at one time, seemed enormously powerful, yet the first two had vanished almost beyond recall and the third was now in prison. So, too, the "occupying regime" in Jerusalem would someday be gone.
His message was, in essence, "This too shall pass."
Yes indeed, but not separate conspiracies, it's the same one.
The conspiracy is global, and in fact, globalism is its aim, to unite the entire world into a single economy and totalitarian government.
Supposed "international terrorism" is almost entirely a scam used toward that aim, as are nearly all of the other manufactured crises that we are told threaten to destroy civilization if urgent action isn't undertaken by the government, such as: global warming, disease epidemics, worldwide economic collapse, nuclear proliferation, etc etc etc etc.
Since you mentioned England and Spain let's look at those cases a little closer.
In both cases, supposedly, some terrorist suicide bombers blew up the trains.
But why would anyone suicide themselves just to blow up a carload of civilian strangers. Especially when they could have simply left their bombs on the train and lived to tell the tale.
Suicide bombings are nearly always faked. A bomb goes off and right away the authorities come up with names and photos and the whole story about the supposed bombers. It's worse than the cheap made for TV movies that they so effectively use to dumb people down.
After the blast they can blame anybody they like and make up a whole story about the organization etc ec. The only way anybodu is going to know its fake is if the supposed suicide bomber turns up alive later (as 9 of the 19 named WTC "suicide hijackers" did).
I already showed in a post above that Ahmadinejad never made that statement or anything like it. It was a false translation by Haeretz that put those words in his mouth.
The Bush League and Israel have mounted a big campaign to twist Ahmadinejad's words and pretend that he threatened war against Israel when he never did.
They can't tell the truth because it would be too lame.
What if Bush had told the truth:
"The Iranian president has quoted Ayatollah Khomeini, who died seventeen years ago, as saying 'the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time?'" Pretty lame, huh?
Or if Bush had said the truth about Iran's nuclear program,
"Given ten years time, Iran might be able to build a single nuclear weapon to use against Israel, which itself has had a couple hundred nukes for quite awhile?" Pretty lame, too.
So the Bush leaguers had to jazz up the story some.
They said to themselves: "Here's how we'll spin it, We'll say Ahmadinejad has stated publicly that he wants to wipe Israel off the map. And since Iran is trying to enrich uranium for its nuclear power plants, we'll say that Iran plans to nuke Israel.
In international diplomacy, the job of translation is always the job of the speaker's own team of translators, never the translators of other nations.
Those nations might have their own translators, but only the speaker's own translators can be trusted to faithfully interpret what the speaker says.
So when Ahmadinejad speaks, the only valid translation to English is that effected by his own translators. But Ooby_Dooby has quoted translations that came from Haeretz, an Israeli news agency with ties to the Israeli government.
Could we trust Iran to translate speeches by the Israeli Prime Minister into English? No, of course not.
And by the same token we can't trust Israel's translation of the Iranian president's speeches.
For example: We have often heard that Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be wiped of the face of the map.
But he never said anything like that.
What he said, in a speech to Iranian youth was a direct quote from the late Ayatollah Khoumeini:
" ???? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ??? "
"The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time"
So there was absolutely no threat of violence or war. Just a citation from Khoumeini wishing for the eventual end of the Zionist occupational régime.
I echo that wish.
It's nothing but hypocrisy to accuse Iran of agressive intent on the basis of such seriously twisted translations.
What country on earth has invaded or orchestrated coups in more foreign nations than any other nation in history?
Not Iran.
What nations occupy the territory of other nations at this moment?
Not Iran.
What countries have huge stocpiles of nuclear weapoons?
The big flu epidemic is about to be unleashed upon us.
For 2 years they have been stockpiling massive quantities of Tamiflu which only has has a 3 year shelflife, and they've been hyping up the supposed danger of the current swine flu strain, even though, so far, it has been no more virulent than any other seasonal flu epidemic.
I'm much more leery of the shots they want to impose than I am of the virus itself.
Although, it is entirely possible that the final form of the virus may turn out to be much more virulent than the introductory version we have seen so far.
Still I'll count on my immune system instead of their shots.
As the weather gets colder, you can prepare against colds by taking cats-claw. A natural immune system booster.
If a cold is just starting, you can sometimes avoid it nearly entirely by drinking strong hot ginger tea while taking a hot bath, and then going directly to a very warm bed. The idea is to sweat out the toxins that actually cause the cold symptoms. But this only works if the cold hasn't fully taken hold yet.
For all colds drink a lot of lemon water, eat a lot of garlic and rest as much as possible.
If it's a chest cold, add a shot of whiskey to the lemon water every couple of hours. The alcohol thins the congestion.
If you have coughing spells inhale air through a poltice of freshly cut onions in order to fill your lungs with onion vapor. It will stop the coughing for a while and open up the bronchii as well as killing opportunistic bacteria that may be present due to the congestion.
If your sinuses are plugged, make a strong thyme tea and inhale the vapor from it for a few minutes before drinking it.
rizlared: I can assure you that I could take you to hundreds of (English) restaurants where the food is better than France... En guard!! Ziss means war.
As head of the government, commander in chief of the armed forces, and head of the vast homeland security network, Obama has ready access to a lot of different very professional printshops that specialize in forgeries.
They could forge a birth certificate so "real" that it would be incontestable.
So it's ridiculous to think that this controversy turns around a piece of paper, that he is refusing to produce.
The controversy is intentional. Everything was done to create it. The object is to create a real legal point of contention concerning Obama's right to rule and thereby polarize the nation into 2 opposing camps, with both sides genuinely convinced that the law is on their side.
It's dialectics. Intentionally created conflict designed to bring about predetermined results but making it look like those results were the result of circumstances.
Mark my word, the pro and anti Obama camps will be hyped up to a bitter controversy, and then a series of staged-but-real violent acts will occur, accusations will fan the flames, and a genuine state of civil disorder will arise, "justifying" martial law.
And that will be the end of the American Republic.
Bribing an authority to furnish a document that he should have furnished without the bribe can hardly be considered obtaining the document illegally.
While there is the question of the validity of the document, it is certainly more convincing than the worthless "certification of live birth" that Obama tried to pass off as a birth certificate.
That document exists only in Hawaii and was created because of the many Chinese immigrants who travelled back and forth to China and often brought back children born abroad. It's reserved for cases where an American mother attests to having given birth outside the US. It doesn't require any proof whatsoever. It's valid for citizenship but does not make the person a "natural born citizen" born in the US. Which is exactly what the Constitution requires.
The fact that the document number is blacked out makes it invalid to begin with. And if Obama was born in Africa it means the information on the document is false.
Either way. He's gonna wreck the country. That's his assigned role.
Oops, sorry Lookin4Ubabe, that post was intended for the poster to whom you were responding and not for you. I was answering the quote in your post, not your post.
If you know your history, when income taxes began, they claimed it would only affect the very rich. And people supported the idea of taxing the rich. But that isn't how it turned out is it. The rich pay less taxes than the poor. Because they have legal teams that know all the legal loopholse put there for exactly that purpose. I remember one year when HL Hunt, the richest man in America at the time, paid less taxes than I did.
No politician, especially not one funded by the CFR (bankers) is going to tax the rich and give freebies to the poor. That's just a carrot on a stick to get people to support socialized medicine.
Once it's in place they can change the rules at the drop of a hat, and change them they will.
Here in France the first few years of socialized medicine the people loved it. It seemed like medicine was almost "free". But they were just running up a big debt. Then they changed the rules and only covered 2/3 of medical costs and they also stopped covering many things, people had to take complementary insurance to pay for everything the SECU wouldn't pay for and "surprise" people were spending as much as before for insurance BESIDES the SECU taxes taken directly out of people's pay. What's more they added a special surcharge to pay back the deficit.
So the result is that healthcare costs are considerably higher under socialized medicine than they were when it was private.
And there is no question that, at the same time, the quality of care has gone way down.
As their fees are controlled, General Practitioners and hospitals are poor. Hospitals have to cheat in all sorts of ways just to make ends meet (this was explained to me by a hospital administrator when I caught the hospital cheating on the insurance claim for my hospitalization). Of course the insurance companies make up for the cheating by higher rates for the complementary insurance.
It is ALWAYS the consumer who pays for everything. Everybody else up the food chain just passes costs down. Healthcare will always be paid for by the poor. Adding the cost of an insurance company only increases the cost to the poor because the company not only has operating costs but also profits that come out of the consumer's pockets.
But when it comes to waste, inefficiency, and corruption, the insurance companies can't possibly compete with the state. After all the insurance companies, greedy as they are, have to compete with each other.
People need to realize that under socialized medicine the state profits when retirees die right away.
Well Abraham certainly wasn't "Jewish". He was from Ur. (which at that time certainly wasn't really called "of the Chaldees" as written in Genesis. The Chaldean empire wouldn't exist until a thousand years after Abraham. It arose just prior to Nebuchudnezzar. That's one proof that Genesis was compiled sometime after the Babylonian captivity. Another proof is that Abraham pursued some raiders all the way to Dan. The city Dan was named after Abraham's great grandson. The city existed in Abraham's time but it wasn't called Dan yet.
Aaron was a Levite. And the priesthood he set up can be called either the Aaronic Priesthood or the Levitical Priesthood because it was reseved exclusively to the tribe of Levi.
He was a prophet to whom Abraham gave an offering.
He's mentioned in the New Testament as an example that God already had faithful servants on earth before Abraham. In other words, faith in God didn't start with Abraham.
Jesus was described as being of the order of Melchisedec, that is, his spiritual authority came straight from God and didn't depend upon the Jewish Religion in any way.
RayfromUSA Forum Posts (6,611)
RE: Ahmadinejad says Holocaust was a “lie”
Yeah??? well I have friends who were present at the time and videotaped the whole speech and they will tell you exactly what he said. And play the videotape to prove you wrong.Oh here they come now.
First the lie as it is generally presented.
False claims about what was said.
Now what was actually said.
Here's an exact quote of what he said in Farsi.
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
According to Farsi-language expert Juan Cole, and even right-wing services like MEMRI, the correct translation of what Ahmadinejad said is:
"The Imam said that this regime that is occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."
Ahmadinejad was being prophetic, not threatening.
He was citing Imam Khomeini, who said this line in the 1980s (a period when Israel was still selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as a ghastly threat then).
In his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad had just reminded his audience that the Shah's regime, the Soviet Union, and Saddam Hussein had all, at one time, seemed enormously powerful, yet the first two had vanished almost beyond recall and the third was now in prison. So, too, the "occupying regime" in Jerusalem would someday be gone.
His message was, in essence, "This too shall pass."