Enough farting around on Iran & Nukes

[earth_as_one]

..... rather than relying on the MSM claims which in the case of Iran's leaders are often complete fabrications....


....Here is a Time magazine interview

I guess Time Magazine isn't mainstream?

 

[earth_as_one]

Justice Richard J. Goldstone (South Africa)

Justice Richard J. Goldstone is a director of the International Center for Transitional Justice, Human Rights Watch, the Center for Economic and Social Rights, the Institute for Transitional Justice and Reconciliation and Physicians for Human Rights, and he is on the advisory board of the Project on Justice in Times of Transition. For many years he has served as a governor of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

He has been a visiting professor at NYU Law School, Fordham Law School, Georgetown Law School and Harvard Law School. He is currently the Spinoza Fellow at the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in The Hague.
After graduating from the University of the Witwatersrand with a BA LLB cum laude, Goldstone practiced as an advocate at the Johannesburg Bar.
In 1976 he was appointed senior counsel and in 1980 was made a judge of the Transvaal Supreme Court. In 1989 he was appointed to the Appellate Division.
From 1991 to 1994 he served as the chairperson of the Commission of Inquiry Regarding Public Violence and Intimidation, which came to be known as the Goldstone Commission.

He served as a judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa from July 1994 to October 2003. From 15 August 1994 to September 1996 he served as the chief prosecutor of the United Nations' International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. From August 1999 until December 2001 he was the chairperson of the International Independent Inquiry on Kosovo. In December 2001 he was appointed the co-chairperson of the International Task Force on Terrorism, which was established by the International Bar Association. In April 2004 the secretary-general of the United Nations appointed Goldstone to the independent committee to investigate the Iraqi oil-for-food programme (the Volcker Committee). In October 2007 he was appointed by the Registrars of the United Nations International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda to chair an Advisory Committee on the Archiving of the Documents and Records of the two tribunals.

Justice Goldstone is the recipient of several international human rights awards and most recently the MacArthur Foundation Award for International Justice to be presented at The Hague on 25 May 2009.

http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/0/2796E2CA43CA4D94C125758D002F8D25?opendocument

 

[Colpy]

Link please. Iran has never threatened to nuke Israel.

If you want to know what people actually said, you should read their words directly rather than relying on the MSM claims which in the case of Iran's leaders are often complete fabrications.

Here is a Time magazine interview where Ahmadinejad answers questions about Israel directly:



Also you frequently misquote Ahmadinejad as saying that he wants to "wipe Israel off the map". This webpage objectively analyzes Ahmadinejad's what Ahmadinejad said.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm

The "wipe off the map" quote is about as accurate as the MSM's 2003 claims about Iraq's WMD stockpiles.

I'm making an assumption here that you actually want a fact based opinion.

I did not refer to that quote, although it certainly adds to the body of evidence that Iran's looney leaders desire an end not only to Israel, but to world jewry.

No matter how you translate it, Ahmadinejad's quote is a threat.

Iran is the puppet master of Hezbollah. The leader of Hezbollah has called for the death of all Jews.

Oh, Ever hear of Ratsanjani?????
RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAL

BTW, I couldn't care less what a Holocaust Denier, lunatic, Despot, and murderer has to say to Time magazine.........

 

[ironsides]

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAL

 

[earth_as_one]

EAO
Of course we should believe ImaNutJob - After all the Holocaust is a myth in fact?- He is correct? Right -

Please reference a quote where Ahmadinejad denies the holocaust. You will find many sources which claim that is what Ahmadinejad said. I've never came across a transcript of an Ahmadinejad speech or interview where he claims the holocaust didn't happen.

The MSM usually twists Ahmadinejad's words. Are you actually interested in what he actually has said, or just what the MSM says Ahmadinejad said? Often there is a huge difference between the facts and the MSM's version of the facts when it comes to Ahmadinejad.

I will reference the same Time Interview where Ahmadinejad is asked directly about his holocaust comments:

TIME: Have you considered that Iranian Jews are hurt by your comments denying that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust?
Ahmadinejad: As to the Holocaust, I just raised a few questions. And I didn't receive any answers to my questions. I said that during World War II, around 60 million were killed. All were human beings and had their own dignities. Why only 6 million? And if it had happened, then it is a historical event. Then why do they not allow independent research?
TIME: But massive research has been done.
Ahmadinejad: They put in prison those who try to do research. About historical events everybody should be free to conduct research. Let's assume that it has taken place. Where did it take place? So what is the fault of the Palestinian people? These questions are quite clear. We are waiting for answers.

"We Do Not Need Attacks" - TIME

Saying "prove the holocaust happened" isn't the same as saying "the holocaust didn't happen".

Do you want to know what I believe personally?

I believe the holocaust happened and I have no problem condemning it as a crime against humanity. But the scale of this tragedy is not accurately known, unless Germans only exterminated people in even numbers. That would be systematic!

Under various programs, Nazi Germany exterminated approximately 11-17 million people because of who they were, rather than what they did. Besides murdering approximately six million Jews, Nazi also murdered millions of ethnic Poles, Romani, Soviet civilians, Soviet prisoners of war, people with disabilities, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and other political and religious opponents.

I have a problem with using this crime against humanity to justify Zionist crimes against Palestinians. I also have a problem with falsely accusing Israel's critics of anti-Semiticism and holocaust denial in order to silence them.

I agree with this Jewish British MP.
YouTube - Jewish British MP on Israel

 

[earth_as_one]

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAL

That link is complete BS. That's not what Rafsanjani said. That's what that website says Rajsanjani said. There is a huge difference.

From IS's link:

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL

TEHRAN 14 Dec. (IPS) One of Iran’s most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".

"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.

Analysts said not only Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani’s speech was the strongest against Israel, but also this is the first time that a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic openly suggests the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State...

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAL

Now compare that mistranslation out of context claim about what Rafsanjani said with what he actually said in a BBC translation of the same speech:

....

US-British support for Israel
It is also supported politically in the United Nations and many other places. They also contain Islamic and Arab governments. Israel needs all of those things and the Americans and Britain are meeting its needs. Therefore, we should consider it to be an outgrowth of colonialism and a multi-purpose colonial base. That is where we should start discussing the next point. So the survival of Israel depends on the interests of imperialists and colonialists. So they go together.

The colonialists will keep this base as long as they need it. Now, whether they can do so or not is a separate issue and this is my next point. Any time they find a replacement for that particular instrument, they will take it up and this will come to an end. This will open a new chapter. Because colonialism and imperialism will not easily leave the people of the world alone. Therefore, you can see that they have arranged it in a way that the balance of power favours Israel. Well, from a numerical point of view, it cannot have as many troops as Muslims and Arabs do. So they have improved the quality of what they have. Classical weaponry has its own limitations. They have limited use. They have a limited range as well. They have supplied vast quantities of weapons of mass destruction and unconventional weapons to Israel. They have permitted it to have them and they have shut their eyes to what is going on. They have nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and long-range missiles and suchlike.

If one day ... Of course, that is very important. If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality. Of course, you can see that the Americans have kept their eyes peeled and they are carefully looking for even the slightest hint that technological advances are being made by an independent Islamic country. If an independent Islamic country is thinking about acquiring other kinds of weaponry, then they will do their utmost to prevent it from acquiring them. Well, that is something that almost the entire world is discussing right now.

Now, even if that does not happen, they can still inflict greater costs on the imperialists. That is possible as well. Developments over the last few months really frightened the Americans. That is a cost in itself. Under special circumstances, such costs may be inflicted on the imperialists by people who are fighting for their rights or by Muslims. Then they will compare them to see how they could advance their interests better or what they can do. However, we cannot engage in such debates for too long. We cannot encourage that sort of thing either. I am only talking about the natural course of developments. The natural course of developments is such that such things may happen. Those who are desperate, but who are also faithful and idealistic, see that this is in their best interests. Then no-one will be able to control them. That is when they become disappointed with such ordinary deceptive methods. Therefore, in the future, the interests of colonialism and imperialism dictate whether Israel will survive or not. Moreover, it is the resistance put up by Muslims and Iraq and the Palestinians themselves that matters. They should besiege imperialists and make them think about whether it serves their interests or not. They should also think about whether maintaining the current balance of power, which favours Israel, is affordable or not. Both of those things may change in the future....

Rafsanjani warns of high cost of US support for Israel

The Iran Press version is so inaccurate and misleading that it can't be a mistake but deliberate misinformation.

 

[Goober]

EAO - Question is at the endPlease reference a quote where Ahmadinejad denies the holocaust. You will find many sources which claim that is what Ahmadinejad said. I've never came across a transcript of an Ahmadinejad speech or interview where he claims the holocaust didn't happen.



TIME: Have you considered that Iranian Jews are hurt by your comments denying that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust?Ahmadinejad: As to the Holocaust, I just raised a few questions. And I didn't receive any answers to my questions. I said that during World War II, around 60 million were killed. All were human beings and had their own dignities. Why only 6 million? And if it had happened, then it is a historical event. Then why do they not allow independent research?



Question 1- How do you interpret his answer on the Holocaust?
Question 2 - Is more research needed to confirm or deny the Holocaust?

 

[Ron in Regina]

I generally avoid these Threads except to hunt for SPAM. I did happen
to watch Larry King interview this Ahmadinejad. My impression to the
responses by Ahmadinejad to King's very direct questions is that this
Ahmadinejad is a very slippery guy.

Here's a Link to the many part interview:


YouTube - Ahmadinejad interview larry king

 

[ironsides]

"Please reference a quote where Ahmadinejad denies the holocaust. You will find many sources which claim that is what Ahmadinejad said. I've never came across a transcript of an Ahmadinejad speech or interview where he claims the holocaust didn't happen."



Irans Ahmadinejad calls Holocaust a lie (Tehran, Sept 18, 2009)
YouTube - Irans Ahmadinejad calls Holocaust a lie (Tehran, Sept 18, 2009)

 

[Colpy]

Any enemy of Israel is a friend of EAO.....which is a damn shame.

He has become so obsessed that he is blindered.

 

[Cannuck]

Just like I figured. Israeli apologists will never admit Israel has committed war crimes or crimes against humanity no matter how blatant, well documented or how impeccable the source.

Of course Israel has committed war crimes. That has nothing to do with Iran getting nukes. Go continue your little Joo-hating circle jerk elsewhere.

When pressed with facts supported by evidence, they hide behind false accusations of anti-Semiticism and insults.

I don't hide behind any type of accusations of anti-Semiticism. I'm calling you a Joo-hater...and a pretty f@&king dense one at that.

 

[earth_as_one]

I generally avoid these Threads except to hunt for SPAM. I did happen
to watch Larry King interview this Ahmadinejad. My impression to the
responses by Ahmadinejad to King's very direct questions is that this
Ahmadinejad is a very slippery guy.

Here's a Link to the many part interview:


YouTube - Ahmadinejad interview larry king

He's a politician. What did you expect?

Ron, Thanks for the link. I never saw this interview previously.

You picked up that he didn't exactly answer a few questions. While some of these non-answers might be due to translation problems, he also appears to have deliberately evaded some questions.

Goober, Larry King asks your questions in that interview. I suggest you watch the interview for the answers such as they are...

Here is my summary of that interview:

Ahmadinejad claims Iran has no interest in nuclear weapons and that nuclear weapons serve no longer serve a useful purpose. He believes that even though the US and Israel possess nuclear weapons they cannot use them against Iran. Rational people in the US and Israel would prevent their use. He says that Iran has been subjected to the most intensive IAEA inspections ever and they have not found any evidence they have violated the NPT. He invites the US and Israel to open their nuclear of programs to the same level of IAEA scrutiny as Iran and like Iran become compliant with the NPT.

Ahmadinejad said that he has no problems with Jews and gave several examples. He was clear his problem was with Zionists, not Jews. More specifically he has a problem with past and present Zionists actions. He compares Zionist policies to Apartheid South Africa and predicts that the Zionist state of Israel will eventually share the same fate as the Apartheid state of South Africa. He believes Zionists are not religious, but hide behind religion and use religion to justify their cruelty. He said he wishes for a peaceful humanitarian solution to the Palestinian problem and calls for a referendum by all people who consider Palestine their home to decide their future by referendum. If you listen carefully, he includes Jews and Israelis as people who consider Palestine their home. He doesn't recognize Israel as a legitimate state, because it was imposed on the people in the region against their will. But he does recognize that people living in Israel consider Palestine their home.

Regarding the Holocaust, he comes cross as skeptical that this event occurred exactly as commonly claimed or believed. He doesn't deny it, but asks why this historical event alone cannot be researched? He also said, that even if this event occurred exactly as claimed, how does this justify punishing Palestinians who were innocent of this crime. Why weren't the holocaust victims awarded land in Europe where the crime took place or elsewhere? (In other words he evaded the question)

 

[Goober]

EAO -
The world does not trust him - Fact - He acquired Nuke tech from Pakistan same fellow sold it to Libya- Fact - He and Iran have been dishonest in their dealings with the IAEA - Fact - He supports terror networks - Fact - He does not want peace with Israel then who would he have to distract the people- Fact - His election was a total fraud - Fact

 

[earth_as_one]

Of course Israel has committed war crimes. That has nothing to do with Iran getting nukes. Go continue your little Joo-hating circle jerk elsewhere.

I don't hide behind any type of accusations of anti-Semiticism. I'm calling you a Joo-hater...and a pretty f@&king dense one at that.

1) Do you condemn these war crimes or support them? Should the people who committed these war crimes be held accountable for their actions. For example, if an Israeli soldier who used Palestinian civilians as human shields came to Canada would you support their arrest and deportation to The Hague to face trial?

Flip side... If a Palestinian militant who fired rockets or mortars at Israeli citizens came to came to Canada, I would support arresting that person and bringing them before the ICC.

2) I've never posted anything which here which is anti-Semitic and I challenge you to find a quote where I specifically say something negative about Jews or Judaism.

I believe you also don't understand the difference between Zionist/Zionism and Jew/Judaism.

Zionism:
An international political movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish People in Palestine. The area was the Jewish Biblical homeland, called the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el). Since the creation of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily as support for the modern state of Israel.

Judaism:
A religion which is based on a set of beliefs and practices originating in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), as later further explored and explained in the Talmud and other texts.

I fully support freedom of religion and the right of people worship their respective religions up to the point where their actions infringe on the fundamental rights of others. I have no problems with Jews or even Zionists, provided they respect the rights of others. If you interpret my posts otherwise, the problem is your interpretation, not my post.

Also, I try not to resort to name calling and personal attacks as I consider it rude and a violation of forum rules. I wish I could say I'm 100% innocent of this, but I cannot. I will say that I only seek polite, civil, rational, intelligent debate, not mudslinging. Please try to respect forum rules and I promise to do likewise.

 

[Goober]

1) Do you condemn these war crimes or support them? Should the people who committed these war crimes be held accountable for their actions. For example, if an Israeli soldier who used Palestinian civilians as human shields came to Canada would you support their arrest and deportation to The Hague to face trial?

Flip side... If a Palestinian militant who fired rockets or mortars at Israeli citizens came to came to Canada, I would support arresting that person and bringing them before the ICC.

2) I've never posted anything which here which is anti-Semitic and I challenge you to find a quote where I specifically say something negative about Jews or Judaism.

I believe you also don't understand the difference between Zionist/Zionism and Jew/Judaism.




I fully support freedom of religion and the right of people worship their respective religions up to the point where their actions infringe on the fundamental rights of others. I have no problems with Jews or even Zionists, provided they respect the rights of others. If you interpret my posts otherwise, the problem is your interpretation, not my post.

Also, I try not to resort to name calling and personal attacks as I consider it rude and a violation of forum rules. I wish I could say I'm 100% innocent of this, but I cannot. I will say that I only seek polite, civil, rational, intelligent debate, not mudslinging. Please try to respect forum rules and I promise to do likewise.

EAOHave you made note of Ima NutJobs routine awnswer of voting - That would include the Palestinians and those abroad - as he states - if the people want to elect a Jew Govt. - that says it all

 

[AnnaG]

The topic is Iran and nukes. But the US and Israel's possession of nukes, their threats to attack Iran and their long list of war crimes and crimes against humanity are factors regarding whether or not Iran should possess nukes. So much of the above is fair game.

I don't think Iran should possess nukes nor do I believe they need them to defend themselves. Iran's missiles tipped with conventional weapons is a sufficient deterrent. I doubt the US or Israel can afford to take on Iran.

Also AnnaG, you appear to have accepted popular anti-Iranian misinformation as fact. I suggest you consider this interview where Ahmadinejad is asked directly:


I recommend that you consider this detailed analysis of what Ahmadinejad said in context:
Does Iran's President Want Israel Wiped Of The Map - Does He Deny Te Holocaust?


de·ceive (d

-s

v

)
v. de·ceived, de·ceiv·ing, de·ceives
v.tr.1. To cause to believe what is not true; mislead.

mis·lead (m

s-l

d

)tr.v. mis·led (-l

d

), mis·lead·ing, mis·leads
1. To lead in the wrong direction.
2. To lead into error of thought or action, especially by intentionally deceiving. See Synonyms at deceive.

Sorry, I don't make a habit of believing what politicians say. As far as anti-Iranian misinfo goes. I don't care. I can't see Iran being any different than any other country in that neighborhood. It has good people and it has war mongers.
Thanks for the def'ns but I already had an idea of what lies are.
So, has Iran ever had any affiliation with Hamas or not? Have the Hamas ever acted as a terrorist or not? Did Ashtiani say he would eliminate Israel from the globe if it attacked Iran or not?

As far as I can tell, BOTH are antagonists and BOTH use propaganda.

 

[earth_as_one]

EAOThe world oes not rrust him - Fact - He aquired Nuke tech from Pakistan same fellow sold it to Libya- Fact - He and Iran have been dishonset in their dealings with the IAEA - Fact - He supports terror networks - Fact - He does not want peace with Isreal then who would he have to distract the people- Fact - His election was a total fraud - Fact

Your facts are really a combination of opinions and inaccurate misinformation. Iran's leaders have their own opinions and interpretations of the "facts". I don't agree with their viewpoints either.

Are you certain "the world" does not trust Iran? You should listen to Larry King's interview with Ahmadinejad posted by Ron. Ahmadinejad deals directly with that issue too. Western Nations and Israel are not the world. The majority of the UN supports Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy. IMO, Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear technology, but not nuclear weapons. Iran claims they only seek peaceful nuclear technology and do not seek nuclear weapons.

Iran signed the NPT in 1968 and agreed not to seek nuclear weapons.

The IAEA has not found any conclusive evidence that Iran possesses or possessed nuclear weapon designs despite allegations. If the IAEA had this proof Iran violated the NPT, they would have declared it. The IAEA is aware that Pakistan's AQ Khan sold plans and parts for gas centrifuges directly and/or indirectly to Iran. Iran's possession of gas centrifuge technology does not violate the NPT.

IMO, Iran seek to come as close as possible within the terms of the NPT to gain nuclear weapons, but respect the NPT until they have a good reason to do otherwise. I believe that an attack against Iran, especially one involving nuclear weapons or other WMDs would cause Iran to seek nuclear weapons as fast as possible.

In 2003, Iran agreed to observe the NPT voluntary protocols, which requires they open up their nuclear program to IAEA inspection/investigation. I have not seen any evidence that Iran has been dishonest with the IAEA. Iran did not allow the IAEA to inspect/investigate before 2003, because that is not an NPT requirement. Until Iran signed the voluntary protocols agreement, they were not obligated to observe it. The MSM and leaders of Western countries claim that because Iran did not allow IAEA inspections before 2003, they violated the NPT and were dishonest with the IAEA.

Iran volunteered to implement additional NPT protocols, but did not sign any agreement committing themselves to this. After the UNSC unfairly imposed sanctions on Iran for their NPT compliant activity (in violation of the NPT), Iran stopped voluntarily implementing the additional protocols. If Iran faces further sanctions in violation of the NPT, Iran has hinted that they will unsign the voluntary protocols which allow IAEA inspection and perhaps even the NPT itself.

IMO, I believe Iran has done it best to abide by the NPT and the voluntary protocols. If the UNSC agreed to respect the NPT and lift their NPT violating sanctions, I believe Iran would agree to implement all NPT safeguards and protocols.

Iran has stated repeatedly they do not support Zionism. They support the liberation of the Palestinian people from Zionist oppression and injustice. As a result they support groups opposed to Zionism and fight for Palestinian freedom and justice.

IMO, Zionsism started out as a worthwhile cause. But over time its become a threat to world peace and security. If Zionism had remained non-violent and acquired land by legal means, I'd support it. But I cannot support ethnic cleansing, violence, theft, murder, war crimes or crimes against humanity. Therefore I cannot support Zionism in its current form. If Zionism embraces peace, justice and freedom, I might consider supporting it. I don't support violence either in support of or resistance to Zionism. I support non-violent resistance against oppression and injustice. I believe most Jews, Israelis and Americans are moral people and would not support Zionist war crimes or crimes about humanity if they were accurately informed.

 

[Goober]

Your facts are really a combination of opinions and inaccurate misinformation. Iran's leaders have their own opinions and interpretations of the "facts". I don't agree with their viewpoints either.

Are you certain "the world" does not trust Iran? You should listen to Larry King's interview with Ahmadinejad posted by Ron. Ahmadinejad deals directly with that issue too. Western Nations and Israel are not the world. The majority of the UN supports Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy. IMO, Iran has a right to peaceful nuclear technology, but not nuclear weapons. Iran claims they only seek peaceful nuclear technology and do not seek nuclear weapons.

Iran signed the NPT in 1968 and agreed not to seek nuclear weapons.

The IAEA has not found any conclusive evidence that Iran possesses or possessed nuclear weapon designs despite allegations. If the IAEA had this proof Iran violated the NPT, they would have declared it. The IAEA is aware that Pakistan's AQ Khan sold plans and parts for gas centrifuges directly and/or indirectly to Iran. Iran's possession of gas centrifuge technology does not violate the NPT.

IMO, Iran seek to come as close as possible within the terms of the NPT to gain nuclear weapons, but respect the NPT until they have a good reason to do otherwise. I believe that an attack against Iran, especially one involving nuclear weapons or other WMDs would cause Iran to seek nuclear weapons as fast as possible.

In 2003, Iran agreed to observe the NPT voluntary protocols, which requires they open up their nuclear program to IAEA inspection/investigation. I have not seen any evidence that Iran has been dishonest with the IAEA. Iran did not allow the IAEA to inspect/investigate before 2003, because that is not an NPT requirement. Until Iran signed the voluntary protocols agreement, they were not obligated to observe it. The MSM and leaders of Western countries claim that because Iran did not allow IAEA inspections before 2003, they violated the NPT and were dishonest with the IAEA.

Iran volunteered to implement additional NPT protocols, but did not sign any agreement committing themselves to this. After the UNSC unfairly imposed sanctions on Iran for their NPT compliant activity (in violation of the NPT), Iran stopped voluntarily implementing the additional protocols. If Iran faces further sanctions in violation of the NPT, Iran has hinted that they will unsign the voluntary protocols which allow IAEA inspection and perhaps even the NPT itself.

IMO, I believe Iran has done it best to abide by the NPT and the voluntary protocols. If the UNSC agreed to respect the NPT and lift their NPT violating sanctions, I believe Iran would agree to implement all NPT safeguards and protocols.

Iran has stated repeatedly they do not support Zionism. They support the liberation of the Palestinian people from Zionist oppression and injustice. As a result they support groups opposed to Zionism and fight for Palestinian freedom and justice.

IMO, Zionsism started out as a worthwhile cause. But over time its become a threat to world peace and security. If Zionism had remained non-violent and acquired land by legal means, I'd support it. But I cannot support ethnic cleansing, violence, theft, murder, war crimes or crimes against humanity. Therefore I cannot support Zionism in its current form. If Zionism embraces peace, justice and freedom, I might consider supporting it. BUt I do not support violence against Zionism. I believe most Jews, Israelis and Americans are moral people and would not support Zionist war crimes or crimes about humanity if they were accurately informed.

Yo Ho - EAO - What about the election????

 

[Goober]

EAO Question 1- How do you interpret his answer on the Holocaust?
Question 2 - Is more research needed to confirm or deny the Holocaust?

 

[earth_as_one]

Sorry, I don't make a habit of believing what politicians say. As far as anti-Iranian misinfo goes. I don't care. I can't see Iran being any different than any other country in that neighborhood. It has good people and it has war mongers.
Thanks for the def'ns but I already had an idea of what lies are.
So, has Iran ever had any affiliation with Hamas or not? Have the Hamas ever acted as a terrorist or not? Did Ashtiani say he would eliminate Israel from the globe if it attacked Iran or not?

As far as I can tell, BOTH are antagonists and BOTH use propaganda.

One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter. Palestine is occupied by a hostile military. They have a legal right to resist violently as per international law. However insurgents resisting an occupation even an illegal one have no right to commit war crimes.

Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups have committed war crimes.

Also I disagree with Canada taking sides in this dispute. We should be official neutral and support any group on either side seeking peaceful resolutions to this dispute. We should not have unshakable support for either side and condemn war crimes and crimes against humanity.