Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

Iranian Conference on the Holocaust

by Patrick Lang
Mon Jan 16th, 2006 at 11:56:21 PM EST

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

"Last month, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech, "They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred, and place this above God, religions and the prophets."
He added, "The West has given more significance to the myth of the genocide of the Jews."
He argued that the "myth" of the Holocaust served as Europe's pretext for the existence of Israel." CNN

It will probably surprise a lot of people that the notion that the West invented the story of the Holocaust as an excuse for the creation and continuing support of Israel is believed by many in the Arab and Islamic Worlds. There are also many in those parts who think that the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a historical document which somehow "leaked" from within Jewish circles.

The president of Iran is not universally thought of as a "nut" in the Middle East. Many think he is merely indiscreet. It should be instructive to those who think that the West's problem with the Islamic World is about communication that while this head of state can comfortably spout such tripe, to say the same thing is a felony crime in many European countries. My father was in the government of occupied Germany and I was taken to see the camp at Dachau at the age of eight. Ahmadinejad is wrong. What would cause people to deny a historical catastrophe of this magnitude?

Many people in "the region" see life as essentially an us versus them, zero sum game in which the "other" is felt to be altogether alien, enemy and hostile. Not all people feel that way, but many do. For folk with that mentality the actions of the other must always be seen as motivated from the same kind of exclusivist hostility that they feel themselves. This is mirror imaging with a vengeance.

The creation of Israel by the Zionist movement with British collusion is seen by such people as a hostile, anti-Arab, anti-Islamic plot carried out with malevolent intent. The idea that such a thing could have happened as a product of serendipitous circumstance is discounted as absurd in such a world view. The West says continuously that the impetus for the independence of Israel after WWII was the Holocaust, therefore this statement must be a lie and part of the plot.

Don't believe me? Wait and see what the judgment of the conference will be...

Pat Lang

Col. Patrick W. Lang (Ret.), a highly decorated retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces, served as “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism" for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and was later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service. Col. Lang was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point. For his service in the DIA, he was awarded the “Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive.” He is a frequent commentator on television and radio, including MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann (interview), CNN and Wolf Blitzer's Situation Room (interview), PBS's Newshour, NPR's "All Things Considered," (interview), and more .

Personal Blog: Sic Semper Tyrannis 2005 || Bio || CV
Recommended Books || More BooTrib Posts
Novel: The Butcher's Cleaver (download free by chapter, PDF format)
"Drinking the Kool-Aid," Middle East Policy Council Journal, Vol. XI, Summer 2004, No. 2

Iranian Conference on the Holocaust | 27 comments (27 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (4.00 / 2)

I shouldn't even be opening my mouth here, but here we go. Let me preface my comments by saying I do not support hate speech or hateful acts against anyone, Jewish or otherwise, and in no way are my comments here (or elsewhere) meant to support those who hate or perpetrate hate acts against ANY group, including against those of the Jewish faith.

The creation of Israel by the Zionist movement with British collusion

Actually that's not how it's seen by most people at all. I've lived in Israel and the non-Jewish perspective is usually that Jewish terrorist groups intimidated the British into leaving the area.

The use of the phrase "jewish terrorist group is not myth or even propaganda. The history of the Irgun is not hidden or secret, even in Israel

The only "collusion" was Lord Balfour's letter to Rothschild, and that was a relatively minor event in the history of the independence of Israel.

Secondly, there is a bit of hypocrisy that is going on here. Turkey is widely criticized for stifling any and all speech denying that the Armenian holocaust occurred. I agree that Turkey should be thusly criticized, as people should be free to debate and examine historical events.

The reason the Iranian president's remarks resonate amongst many is that Israel (and Germany and many other nations) promote a similar policy - that any and all examinations or questioning of the holocaust is actually illegal. Not just something to be deplored, it's actually illegal to question the holocaust. There are people actually on trial and who have been imprisoned for this "crime".

Why should this be so? The facts of the holocaust have been debated by completely non-prejudicial groups, with new information accepted by mainstream scholars. For one example, the memorial at Auschwitz read "4 million killed" for decades, but has since been modified to refer to 1 million.

The fact that Jews were targeted and killed is not denied by (almost) anyone. The question that the Iranian president is referring to is, how many and under what circumstances. There are serious questions about the numbers of those killed and under what circumstances. Why is it illegal to examine these issues?

I myself have spoken to many survivors of concentration camps and heard their stories of horror. Again I am not excusing or allying myself with those who perpetrate hateful speech or acts against any group. I also deplore the fact that many anti-Semitic groups rally around the issue of the holocaust to justify their behavior. I furthermore do not agree in any way with the Iranian president's call to "wipe Israel off the map" as I am advocate for peace for ALL people.

That being said, I also think that this issue is too contentious to be spoken about freely in the United States as it has become an emotionally-laden nuclear bomb. There are other, non-jewish aspects of WW2 which are rarely mentioned or discussed, concerning German POW's, Rroma (gypsies), Poles and other Slavic peoples (esp Ukrainians), Communist party members (German) and physically handicapped people who also suffered greatly in WW2.

The Iranian president has issued many inflammatory, extremist statements. That being said, the issue of the holocaust and questions about it are not solely the province of nuts, anti-Semites and hatemongers.

Pax

Night and day you can find me Flogging the Simian

by soj on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 03:44:55 AM EST

The New Coming Nuclear Holocaust (4.00 / 2)

Soj.....I think you put it really well.

Why wouldn't the number have been exaggerated? That's just typical of any group trying to promote it's cause.

I don't think Israel should ever have been formed. And Nations under the banner of Islam are correct in thinking that it was a plot by the West to take the land they had been living on. It was a plot, it was enacted. The lands were divided by the British and it was enforced. Sadaam Hussein for whatever his motivations may have really been, had a logical argument that Kuwait was part of Iraq. Just as American Indians can make the same claim to the land here. It was with greed and deception that the boundaries of the Mid east were created.

Israel is a very violent nation. It occupation of the West Bank is criminal. It's settlements are clearly part of a conspiracy to prevent the West Bank from being independent.

Having said that, I am not a big fan of Islam or Christianity or Judiasm. I do not feel sympathetic to Islam....The state of Israel and the Islamic or Arab nations around it are one big mess because the mentality of the people is so utterly primitive. There's plenty of blame on both sides with the U.S. and the Britiain and now mainland Europe playing the directors role in creating a new potential nuclear Holocaust.

by Stu Piddy on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 11:30:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Conference on Slavery (none / 1)

Did Slavery actually exist in the US. Now I don't want to applaud racist thought, nor does anyone deny that Black Americans suffered from targetted discrimination, and that indeed some were enslaved, but surely historians should be able to debate whether or not slavery ever existed as a mass, systematic social system in the South. Or perhaps it is just a myth created by Blacks on grossly exaggerated facts, designed to elicit sympathy and guilt among non-Blacks.

The question of whether racist speech should be criminalized is a legitimate one. It is in Europe, it isn't in the US. I personally think it shouldn't be a crime. But for some reason you don't raise that broader issue, merely questioning why a certain category of racist speech should be illegal.

What the Iranians are questioning is whether or not there was a quite successful attempt by the Germans to systematically eradicate the Jewish population in the areas under their control during WWII. But that is not a matter of historical debate, anymore than the slavery example given above, or for that matter that WWII actually occurred as a major war, rather than a few minor skirmishes. Anyone who suggests otherwise is frankly delusional, and it is natural to suspect their motives and/or sanity.

PS - yes some of the details of the Holocaust are debated and revised by serious historians. No, nobody seriously believed that four million died at Auschwitz, regardless of what Communist propaganda said. The figures for the death toll of the Holocaust are also in debate - they range from about five million to seven million murdered Jews. In Poland the figure is roughly three million. - about ninety percent of the prewar Polish Jewish population. Most of the survivors were those who either fled to or were deported to the USSR in 1939-41. Among those who were in Poland about 60,000-80,000 survived. In other words a death rate of 97-98%.

by MarekNYC on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 03:05:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Conference on Slavery (none / 1)

Let's separate two issues here.

If someone wants to issue racist statements, whether that's against Jews or African-Americans or anyone else, that should be deplored. I agree with you that it shouldn't be illegal per se, but definitely to be condemned.

However questioning history is a separate issue. If someone wants to question the established history of slavery in the USA, should that be illegal? I don't think so. Of course most people questioning the established historical account of slavery ARE doing so to further a racist agenda.

That being said, there ARE people who do question the established historical record on a number of issues, including WW2 and the persecution of Jews, who do not do it to further a racist agenda. That this should be a crime in and of itself is wrong in my opinion.

Pax

Night and day you can find me Flogging the Simian

by soj on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 02:18:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Conference on Slavery (4.00 / 2)

What do you mean by 'questioning the established historical record' being a crime? It isn't. There are plenty of debates among historians relating to the Holocaust. I think you don't understand what it is you need to do to get prosecuted. Examples are suggesting that there was no systematic extermination of Jews, denying the existence of gas chambers, arguing that the number of Jews killed lies in the hundreds of thousands rather than millions. None of those are an alternative point of view of history any more than saying that the world is ten thousand years old is an alternative view of geology. They are simply lies. Technically I suppose such delusional nonsense could be separate from racism, in the real world, however, those who promote it are inevitably racist.

There is thus a fundamental difference between the Turkish banning of discussing the Armenian genocide and the European banning of Holocaust denial. One seeks to ban speaking the truth because of a chauvinistic insistence on lies, the other criminalizes lying based on racism. In other words one bans a critique of racism, the other bans racist speech. From an abstract freedom of speech point of view both are limits on freedom, but it is wrong to blithely equate the two.

by MarekNYC on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 10:48:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (none / 0)

It always gets back to Palestine doesn't it?

That all makes sense in historical context. How do you think the Arab world considers the other countries "made up" by the British a few years earlier. Are they all part of the big lie too, in their Muslim weltenshaung?

I mean, wasn't it because the Brits had been doing that sort of thing for many years that they and their allies felt they could do the same thing and make up Israel?

It all went bad from the start and the world would have been better off if they had been given a piece of Africa which was on the table.

by Keone Michaels on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 12:19:04 AM EST

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (4.00 / 2)

er...

How do you think the Arab world

Iran's not an Arab country.

Qui faciant leges ubi sola pecunia regnat? -- Petronius

by Karl the Idiot (email: bleet54(yahoo)) on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 12:48:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (none / 0)

How about Saudi? Is it Arab? was it "made up" that's what I was referencing not Iran.

by Keone Michaels on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 01:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (none / 1)

upon re-reading, I see the confusion. It should read "Muslim" world but I would assume a holocaust conference would include Muslims from many non-Arab countries.

by Keone Michaels on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 01:23:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I Wouldn't Be Especially Rational Either (none / 1)

if your neighbor killed half your family so the courts gave you my house.

We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King, "Beyond Vietnam"

by Gooserock on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 01:36:39 AM EST

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (none / 0)

CNN Banned From Iran
.
After receiving a warning from Israeli politicians for biased journalism on the IDF Forces in occupied Palestinian territory a few years ago that led to the dismissal of a CNN Editor, CNN has been notified of a ban in Iran for their reporters.

CNN reported a statement from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the IAEA conflict as follows: "Iran reserves the right to possess nuclear weapons". Just at a time when lack of balanced reporting in the MSM exarcerbates the fear for Iranian nuclear research and possibility of developing a nuclear bomb.

Yesterday and today, CNN broadcasted their apologies to Iranian authorities and the viewers, admitting an error "in translation" of the statement. The Iranian President was correctly quoted as the right to possess nuclear energy. The words nuclear weapons have been retracted by the CNN newsroom and excuses expressed.

Iran: CNN Banned Over "Translation Error"

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran's government banned CNN journalists from working in the country after a "translation error" broadcast by CNN mistakenly quoted Iran's president as saying his nation has the right to build nuclear weapons, the state-run news agency said.

CNN was not informed directly by the Iranian government that it was banned from the country. The dispute arises from a moment of simultaneous translation Saturday.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slams efforts to stop Iran's nuclear program.

As Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was speaking, an interpreter working for a translation company hired by CNN misquoted him as having said Iran has the right to build nuclear weapons.

In fact, he said Iran has the right to nuclear energy, and that "a nation that has civilization does not need nuclear weapons." He added, "Our nation does not need them."

The incorrect translation was aired on CNN later Saturday.

As soon as it was alerted to the error, CNN on Sunday corrected the translation and clarified Ahmadinejad's remarks. The network also apologized.

In a written statement, CNN said it "apologized on all its platforms which included the translation error, including CNN International, CNNUSA and CNN.com, and also expressed its regrets to the Iranian government and the Iranian ambassador to the U.N."

≈ Cross-posted from my diary --
NYT & Patrick Lang Beating the War Drums ¶ Exacerbates Fear of Iran ≈

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY

by Oui on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 03:00:08 AM EST

Re: Iranian Conference on the Holocaust (none / 1)

<<Turkey is widely criticized for stifling any and all speech denying that the Armenian holocaust occurred.>>

Isn't it just the opposite? Turkey stifles any and all speech asserting that the Armenian holocaust occurred.

I think there is a major problem when there is a widespread belief in the Muslim world that the holocaust didn't occur. It suggests a level of irrationality, a refusal to admit reality, a determination to tailor reality to one's own belief system that is frightening in a leader of a nation about to join the nuclear club.

We are not talking here about someone who argues that the holocaust claimed the lives of 5 million, not 6 million Jews. Ahmadinejad is not engaging in an examination of the historical record at hand. He is engaging in an outright denial of that record. I don't think we can, or should, sugarcoat his stance.

by JLG on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 03:53:06 PM EST

I don't think the belief is widespread anywhere (4.00 / 2)

that it did not occur. There are many people who believe that it occurred in Germany, however, as opposed to Palestine, and the myth of why Israel was "created" is a cherished belief in the US, whereas other people, and not just Muslims, have a more reality-based view. But this is not the fault of Americans, who are taught about the Holocaust in detail (though sadly, not so much about the events that led up to it and made it possible) very little about US-UK imperialism in the region prior even to Hitler's birth, and nothing at all about the Naqba. (sometimes spelled Nakba, for those who want to google)

But the most important aspect, and the reason for all this about Ahmadinejad and the conference, is to solidify American, and to a lesser extent, European enthusiasm for the invasion and occupation of Iran.

I believe the project will be very successful, though I can't really say I think it is necessary.

one man's conspiracy is another man's business plan
Blog updated as needed

by DuctapeFatwa (DuctapeFatwa@yahoo.com) on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 04:17:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Disagree and Agree (none / 0)

Is there such a thing as holocaust denial denial?

What is it that Goebbels taught us? If you repeat a lie often enough, the people will believe it, no matter how ridiculous it is? The Arab media is following the Goebbels playbook, and their lie is that the holocaust is a Zionist fabrication. (Except when a jarring self-contradictory note is sounded and they let slip that the holocaust did happen and that it was a good thing.)

I'm just in the first week of my Arabic class, so I'm not reporting this firsthand; I'm relying on the reports of others who observe the Arab press. They are reporting something of an obsession with the topic. A recent Aljazeerah on-line poll said that 84% agreed with the statement that Zionism is worse than Nazism. Obviously, not a scientific poll, and one that does not address the truth of the holocaust per se (although it is hard to believe that someone who accepted the historical reality of the holocaust could still see Zionism as a greater evil), but it is interesting because the responses were drawn from a group of people who are at a level of affluence that allows them to have a computer and who have access to internet news sources that are not controlled by the government. At the very least, we cannot dismiss the phenomenon of holocaust denial in the area.

I do agree that the Western media attention at this time is part of the lead-up to an invasion of Iran. But if the Iranians were deliberately acting to provoke such an invasion, they could hardly do a better job.

by JLG on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 05:56:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm not sure if it's a good idea to post (4.00 / 2)

on a public blog that you are studying Arabic, it could make you a recruitment target for Washington, especially if you have already had a week of lessons.

And one could make the argument that the Arab press, like the French or Bulgarian or any other press, may not be universally perceived as a monolith, but that is neither here nor there.

You may enjoy being able to read news reports for yourself, as your lessons continue, although some might advise you to continue with your current strategy of having others interpret it all for you.

Whether atrocities against one group are "worse" or "as bad as" atrocities against another group touches on some irreconcilable cultural disconnects, as does the question of why the Holocaust took place, and a host of other questions that do not offer a greater comfort level than questioning the official version of the 911 events.

And yes, your remark concerning certain operations within Iran itself is quite insightful, but it will probably not be a good idea to look into that too closely, lest you be accused of opposing Operation Iranian Freedom.

one man's conspiracy is another man's business plan
Blog updated as needed

by DuctapeFatwa (DuctapeFatwa@yahoo.com) on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 06:21:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

A Rebuttal (none / 0)

.
See a full rebuttal on the topics of this diary ::

Holocaust - Pat Lang on Israel and the Iranian Conference A Rebuttal

I do object to the many generalizations in Pat Lang's diary, and a bias towards the Islamic World, similar views expressed by neocons and the Israeli lobby in the U.S. Point by point I review the statements made and offer some context and a rebuttal.

Jewish Library

For years, Saddam Hussein's Iraq served as a counterweight to the regional hegemonic designs of the theocrats in Tehran; however, the removal of Saddam from power, and destruction of his army, has left Iran as the most powerful nation in the Gulf. Iran is viewed by its Arab neighbors as a menace. Iran has a long record of coveting their resources and territory, and Iran's radical Muslim leaders have consistently sought to export their revolution beyond their nation's borders.

So, after supporting the Kurds and charlatan Chalabi to have Saddam removed and Iraq destroyed, the Israeli government and society are happy to continue the struggle by entertaining the West with continous propaganda of other Arab and Islamic nations in the Middle East.

«« click on pic for story

B'Tselem's Israeli Information Center for H.R. in the Occupied Territories. Oren Ziv, Indymedia Israel

The occupation of Palestinian land of the West Bank and Gaza, the Golan heights of Syria, the invasion, occupation and destruction of Southern Lebanon and Beirut in the eighties, what is next for American soldiers to die for?

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY

by Oui on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 04:06:08 PM EST

Mirror mirror on the wall (none / 1)

Ahmadinejad's holocaust denials are nothing but a smokescreen & totally irrelevant to today's confrontation with Iran. The only reason to highlight & harp on his foolish remarks is to further demonize & dehumanize the Iranian people, a task accomplished through language that becomes unquestioningly repeated. Resisting that 'group think' vocabulary is one of the more important taks beofre us now. Understanding the cultural (& domestic political) context in which his remarks are made is important; debating whether or not the holocaust occurred is mere diversion.

Lang's words here are instructive --not for the snide "analysis" -- but for what they reveal about an institutional & cultural Jungian shadow, disgusted by the sight in the Other of what is known, but denied, to reside within U.S.:

Many people in "the region" see life as essentially an us versus them, zero sum game in which the "other" is felt to be altogether alien, enemy and hostile. Not all people feel that way, but many do. For folk with that mentality the actions of the other must always be seen as motivated from the same kind of exclusivist hostility that they feel themselves. This is mirror imaging with a vengeance.

Wonderful, brief psychological analysis of the country which presents the pre-emininent threat to world peace today.

". . . the more educated you are, the more indoctrinated you are. After all, propaganda is largely directed towards the privileged." -Noam Chomsky

by Arcturus on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 08:53:57 PM EST

Re: Mirror mirror on the wall (2.50 / 2)

OK, so the leader of a soon-to-be nuclear power denies that the holocaust ever happened and pledges to wipe Israel all the map, and you think we should just shrug our shoulders and say it's just a smokescreen.

Of course, you are correct that domestic politics play a role in these remarks. Extreme anti-Israel rhetoric has long been useful to Mideast leaders to divert attention from the failures of their regimes. Maybe the remarks can be dismissed as empty rhetoric, but imminent membership in the nuclear club gives such remarks their ominous character.

We've been through this before, a madman coming to power with an extreme anti-Semitic agenda and the military means to implement it. I don't want to go there again.

I don't know if Ahmadinejad is a madman, I don't know if he means what he says. But I am doubly disturbed, first by the remarks themselves and second by the ease with which they are being dismissed here.

by JLG on Tue Jan 17th, 2006 at 09:50:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Mirror mirror on the wall (none / 1)

The all or nothing acceptance conditions you offer make it difficult to support what you are trying to promote. I think you might be misunderstanding or misrepresenting what many of us are trying to say.

by rumi on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 02:42:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

madmen & smokescreens (none / 1)

Imminent? Not according to the nuclear experts. They are at least 5-10 years away.

The constant repetition of epithets like "madman" is more dangerous than any of Ahmadinejad's speeches, however odious they are.

Examine closely Iran's stance in the world & one discovers that they have followed a pragmatic line, not an ideological one, depsite the revolutionary rhetoric. Iran does not have a history of military aggression against its neighbors. The notion that Iran might launch a nuclear first-strike is absurd; reason says a nuclear capability would serve as a deterrent much as it has elsewhere in the world.

Here's an example of the smokescreen. A Jan. 12, 2006 article in Bloomberg ends with this sentence:

Concerns that Iran may develop nuclear capabilities intensified following comments last year by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in which he called for the eradication of Israel and denied the existence of the Nazi Holocaust.

What on earth is the logic in that sentence?

". . . the more educated you are, the more indoctrinated you are. After all, propaganda is largely directed towards the privileged." -Noam Chomsky

by Arcturus on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 01:59:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: madmen & smokescreens (none / 1)

<<Concerns that Iran may develop nuclear capabilities intensified following comments last year by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in which he called for the eradication of Israel and denied the existence of the Nazi Holocaust.<p> What on earth is the logic in that sentence?>>

I don't see what your problem is with that sentence. Recent statements of Ahmadinejad have called into question (a) whether Iran is as committed to non-aggression as you contend and (b) whether Ahmadinejad himself has any grip on reality.

Perhaps Ahmadinejad is a pragmatist who spouts an ideologically charged line for the political boost it gives him at home. That's the most sanguine view, and it may well be the correct one. But I can't shrug off his statements, and I don't think it's illogical that those statements have amplified concerns about Iran's intentions in developing nuclear weapons.

But examine further your statement that Iran wants the weapons purely for defensive purposes. Isn't that an odd sort of posture since it is the very development of the weapons that is opening up the possibility of an attack? If their primary concern is in not being invaded, wouldn't the obvious step be to dismantle the program?

I would also question your assertion that we have 5-10 years. That's one opinion. Other experts have said it may be a matter of months. I seem to recall that when new nations enter the nuclear club (and it's been a while), it is always accompanied by expressions of surprise from experts who had thought that China or India or Pakistan was X years away from a functional weapon.

by JLG on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 04:23:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think it is has already been mentioned here (none / 1)

in at least one diary, but you can google the phrase "Iranian bourse euro"

one man's conspiracy is another man's business plan
Blog updated as needed

by DuctapeFatwa (DuctapeFatwa@yahoo.com) on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 04:32:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I think it is has already been mentioned here (none / 1)

Thanks. With all the talk of smokescreens, it would have been useful for Arcturus to give some hint of what the smokescreens were supposed to be hiding.

by JLG on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 04:58:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

knock it off (none / 1)

Listen, you're free to disagree, but this doesn't need turn personal.

Sorry if the dots weren't connected well enough. The 'smokescreen' is the raising of irrelevant issues, manipulating people's emotions, & demonizing the Iranians (through the personhood of the president, just as was done with Noriega, Hussein, & now Chavez) in order to force a situation where we can force sanctions through the UN or use military aggression against a country that has done nothing.

Equating Ahmadinejad's racism & even his calls for Israel to be wiped off the map (which despite all efforts by the Western media does not equate to a call to attack & btw, is nothing new, having been official policy ever since the 1979 revolution) with a heightened nuclear threat, as did the Bloomberg article I quoted, has no inherent logic. At a time when my country is openly threatning a nuclear first strike, it is imperative to challenge the validity of such truisms as Pat Lang expressed here the other day & that clutter our media everywhere that the world can not afford a nuclear armed Iran.

We can not "afford" a nuclear war.

". . . the more educated you are, the more indoctrinated you are. After all, propaganda is largely directed towards the privileged." -Noam Chomsky

by Arcturus on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 05:29:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: madmen & smokescreens (none / 0)

Recent statements of Ahmadinejad have called into question (a) whether Iran is as committed to non-aggression as you contend

There have been promises of retaliation if Iran is attacked by either Israel or the US; Iran has not threatened its neighbors nor will you find any news reports of such.

and (b) whether Ahmadinejad himself has any grip on reality.

I've made my position clear as to this kind of inflammatory, racist rhetoric being used to beat the drums of war.

Isn't that an odd sort of posture since it is the very development of the weapons that is opening up the possibility of an attack? If their primary concern is in not being invaded, wouldn't the obvious step be to dismantle the program?

There is no evidence that Iran is currently developing weapons, nor is that why they are being threatened today. They have a legal right to enrich uranium. Would they like them? Sure, and I doubt they won't eventually restart their weapons program. They are surrounded by nuclear states: Pakistan, India, Russia, Israel -- & now the US in Iraq & Afghanistan. MAD has been embraced by many supposedly rational actors; why should that be such a crazy desire for Iran?

Al usual, however, the real reasons driving current hostilities have nothing to do with nuclear weapons. Ductape's pointer towards the Iranian bourse, scheduled to come on line in March, might be a better place to turn your concern.

I would also question your assertion that we have 5-10 years. That's one opinion.

No, that's the shared opinion of the world's nuclear proliferation experts.

Other experts have said it may be a matter of months.

Not outside Israel. And they have zero credibility on this issue.

". . . the more educated you are, the more indoctrinated you are. After all, propaganda is largely directed towards the privileged." -Noam Chomsky

by Arcturus on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 05:09:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: madmen & smokescreens (2.00 / 2)

There are smokescreens and there are rose colored glasses.

<<Iran has not threatened its neighbors nor will you find any news reports of such.>>

No, there have only been threats to wipe Israel off the map. I guess since the two nations don't touch each other there is no threat against a "neighbor."

<<There is no evidence that Iran is currently developing weapons>>

This is beginning to sound like the Daily Worker writing about Stalin in the 1930s.

<<I've made my position clear as to this kind of inflammatory, racist rhetoric>>

I haven't said anything racist. I have been under the impression that we have been discussing the remarks of one individual (highly inflammatory and anti-Semitic remarks, but they don't seem to bother you much), an individual who, as it happens, is of the same race as I am (unless Iranians or Muslims have acquired the status of race). I resent your making such an accusation.

My main motivation for originally posting in this thread was to correct a misstatement about Turkey and the Armenian genocide. The powerful undertow of Mideast politics has dragged me far afield into a discussion that has become more acrimonious than I would have liked. Well, I've said my say and don't feel the need to post anymore here, but I would appreciate it if you'd take back the bit about racism.

by JLG on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 05:47:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

racism (none / 1)

I don't appreciate your half-reading my comments & then making personal attacks, especially when avoiding the overarching point of those remarks, which had do to with demonizing, propagandizing language to beat the drums of war, is being ignored. Once again, knock it off please.

This whole 'he's crazy' repetition does strike me as participating in the language of demonization, as it draws on & feeds into the dynamics of racism in the U.S. & deserves to be pointed out.

Two articles that align pretty well with my thought on Iran are:

Simon Jenkin's The west has picked a fight with Iran that it cannot win: Washington's kneejerk belligerence ignores Tehran's influence and the need for subtle engagement

and a piece by Bill Christison (a former senior official of the CIA, who served as a National Intelligence Officer and as Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis) and Kathleen Christison (a former CIA political analyst who has worked on Middle East issues for 30 years and the author of Perceptions of Palestine and The Wound of Dispossessio: It's More Important Than Slowing Nuclear Proliferation: Let's Stop a US / Israeli War on Iran

". . . the more educated you are, the more indoctrinated you are. After all, propaganda is largely directed towards the privileged." -Noam Chomsky

by Arcturus on Wed Jan 18th, 2006 at 06:20:52 PM EST

Iranian Conference on the Holocaust | 27 comments (27 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. FAQ
. Search

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Gift Cards * New Arrivals

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Senator Edward M. Kennedy tells his extraordinary personal story:

True Compass: A Memoir
by Edward M. Kennedy.

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

Boran2 and maryb2004 recommend:

The Big Over Easy: A Nursery Crime
by Jasper Fforde

Must-have information for all presidents-and citizens-of the twenty-first century?

Physics for Future Presidents: The Science behind the Headlines
Richard A. Muller

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
by Doris Kearns Goodwin

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES
Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.

Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")

Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)

Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)

"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen

The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review

BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual
$79.95 * Sale: $59.95

Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)

The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan

Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----

Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review

Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey

1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus

Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)

The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids
by Madeline Levine

Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com
:

We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:

Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.

Technorati Profile