TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Iran To Host Holocaust Conference
Iran To Host Holocaust Conference
Wow!! All I have to say, is Wow!!
| quote: |
"I have visited the Nazi camps in Eastern Europe. I think it is exaggerated." Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi SOURCE |
is smoking... 
Hitler used hatred against the jews to unite the people and gain power, which gave him the possibility and public support to wage war against the rest of the world.
Ahmenidjad uses same thing, but now with Israel. If someone thinks that he will be satisfied with the total destruction of Israel is refusing to learn from the near history 70 years ago.
The free world refuses to learn from its biggest mistke in history.
Sort of like having the annual Fireman's ball at the local arsonist's house...
You do realize there's also a Holocaust revisionist movement inside the jewish community 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Flotser Hitler used hatred against the jews to unite the people and gain power, which gave him the possibility and public support to wage war against the rest of the world. Ahmenidjad uses same thing, but now with Israel. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley And that is different how exactly to what the American/Israeli governments are doing against Muslims? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley And that is different how exactly to what the American/Israeli governments are doing against Muslims? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jdat What is your point? One wrongful behavior does not invalidate another. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Flotser I don't live in the US so i will not answer that. But i do know Israel doesn't teach for hatred of muslims or arabs. No dictator is standing in the head of israel and gaining its power from spreading hatred towards the arabs. You don't see crowds of israelis scream 'Death to X' (X = any arab country) like in this clip from Iran: http://memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S5&P1=165# In school we allways talked about piece and sang songs about piece. Nobody teaches in Israel that arabs are pigs and evil or or drink blood of children like shown on arab national TV about jews and Israelis. Children cartoons In Iran teach kids they should become suicide bombers. So do children shows in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and more just pick a clip from here: http://memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S5&P1=165# You will funk must see clips like: -Egyptian Cleric Sheik Muhammad Sharaf Al-Din on a Children Show: The Jews Are the People of Treachery, Betrayal, and Vileness. -Egyptian Cleric Sheik Muhammad Nassar Tells a Group of Children about Child Martyrdom in the Early Days of Islam -Jews Turn into Apes and Pigs in an Clay-mation Film for Children on Hizbullah TV -Iranian Animated Film for Children Promotes Suicide Bombings -3�-Year-old Egyptian Basmallah: Jews Are Apes and Pigs (Archival Material) etc.. enjoy |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley No it does not, and that was my point, that while people (rightly) criticise Iran's and various militia group's demonisation of the Jews, they themselves are subjected to the same level of propaganda against the Muslims in order for their own ruling elites to pursue and gain support for various policies (such as America's "war on terror" which is actually the PNAC plan for US global domination) It's just that Western propaganda is not so obvious... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by jdat So what are your recommendations? Should the West or anyone else who has had issues with Iran/Islam/Arabs/etc now or in the past be quiet and not be allowed to voice an opinion on this type of matter or anything pertaining to local politics? Ps: I'm not pointing fingers I'm just trying to understand |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley No it does not, and that was my point, that while people (rightly) criticise Iran's and various militia group's demonisation of the Jews, they themselves are subjected to the same level of propaganda against the Muslims |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley in order for their own ruling elites to pursue and gain support for various policies |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley (such as America's "war on terror" which is actually the PNAC plan for US global domination) It's just that Western propaganda is not so obvious... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Flotser Same level of propoganda ?? how can you compare it?? Show me children TV shows in USA or Israel that dehumenize muslims, or show me a children show that encoureges the kids in Israel or USA to sacrifice themselves and killing muslims. Show me a demonstration that happened in USA or Israel that resembeles the one i gave link for in previous post. The propoganda used in Iran is the closest to Nazi propoganda - the one propoganda proven to be very affective unfortunetly. |
| quote: |
| What ruling elites are you talking about in Israel? No prime ministers in Israel were ever spreading hatred towards the muslims. I'm not even talking about using the education system and controlling the mass media like in Iran. |
| quote: |
| well i think 9/11 is a good resson to open in a 'war on terror', or are you among the one that think it was made by US goverment...? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley It's a different kind of propaganda. It's not the same as what you describe above. Western governments are spreading and encouraging anti-Islam propaganda to promote their own agendas in the Middle East. |
| quote: |
They peddle false information about Islamic terrorists, what their aims are, what their greviences are, etc. |
| quote: |
They create an environment where the public begin to see Islam as the problem, not just this minority extremism. They'll encourage people to look at the Koran and decide it "allows" violence and the only logical conclusion is that all Muslims believe in this. |
| quote: |
Tony Blair continuously claims the 7/7 bombings occured not because of British foriegn policy but because "they hate us and our way of life". This, despite the people who carried out the attack stating it was because of the Iraq war. This propaganda is being peddled by our governments, their supporters and sections of our media. Just look at some of the posters on here to see the effects!! |
| quote: |
I don't think America carried out the 9/11 attacks but the Bush administration definately shot their load at hearing the good news. This is not a war on terror, this is PNAC's plan (which I have posted on another thread) which they drew up in 2000 to secure American military and economic global domination. It's all there in black and white explaining how they will be unable to muster public support without a tragic event like Pearle Harbour. Now they got that event, they need to maintain anti-Muslim sentiments in the population so they can continue pursuing their Middle Eastern policies and they acheive that by spreading and encouraging anti-Muslim propaganda |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r ...like? What unlike the video and tapes they GIVE us?? So by simply reporting it, they're spreading propaganda and lies...right... No, they (the extremists) do hate us and everything we stand for actually... Sorry, don't have enough tin-foil for this paragraph! |
As for the last paragraph, you don't need tin-foil just a pair of eyes and a fucking brain...
http://www.newamericancentury.org/R...casDefenses.pdf
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley This is not a war on terror, this is PNAC's plan (which I have posted on another thread) which they drew up in 2000 to secure American military and economic global domination. It's all there in black and white explaining how they will be unable to muster public support without a tragic event like Pearl Harbour. Now they got that event, they need to maintain anti-Muslim sentiments in the population so they can continue pursuing their Middle Eastern policies and they acheive that by spreading and encouraging anti-Muslim propaganda |
| quote: |
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event "like a new Pearl Harbor". The odd word here seems to be "transformation". What do they mean? Let's look back to the beginning of the same chapter. "To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades, the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs. Information technologies,in particular, are becoming more prevalent and significant components of modern military systems. These information technologies are having the same kind of transforming effects on military affairs as they are having in the larger world. The effects of this military transformation will have profound implications for how wars are fought, what kinds of weapons will dominate the battlefield and, inevitably, which nations enjoy military preeminence". So "transformation" refers to the process of introducing more information technologies into the military. What does 9/11 have to do with that? Nothing at all. In fact, the attacks demonstrated that one of the PNAC's pet schemes, a global missile shield, is entirely useless when planes can become bombs. Now, its certainly true that Bush has continued to fund it, and with significant budget increases immediately post 9/11, but who says he wouldnt have done so anyway? The reality is that the attacks themselves only give ammunition to hjs critics. And some of them had it immediately: Some elected officials got the message. Sen. Carl Levin told Rumsfeld at a June 2001 hearing that we were lavishing money on missile defense and not "putting enough emphasis on countering the most likely threats to our national security ... like terrorist attacks." |
| quote: |
Back to the PNAC, where there's still the "Pearl Harbor" aspect. What did they mean by that? We can get an indication from the one other sentence in the document that uses the phrase. "Absent a rigorous program of experimentation to investigate the nature of the revolution in military affairs as it applies to war at sea, the Navy might face a future Pearl Harbor as unprepared for war in the post-carrier era as it was unprepared for war at the dawn of the carrier age". The use of Pearl Harbour here means "a form of attack which we don't have the technology to counter", which now lets us make more sense of the first quote. All they're saying is that "the process of updating the US military will take a long time, unless the problems are made apparent by an attack that reveals our technical failings". 9/11 undoubtedly revealed failings in intelligence and response on the day, but nothing that matches the PNACs agenda. Theres no military technology fix that would have prevented it. |
So basically they use "Pearl Harbour" in one context, therefore they use it the same in the sentence I'm talking about? And what do they mean by "catacysing"?
And we are of course only talking about one document out of dozens the PNAC and their members/supporters have produced outlining their plans. You might wanna read the Present Danger as well, or the letter they sent to Clinton begging him to invade Iraq. The article I posted above is purely about reshaping US military. There are articles and documents covering all aspects of their plans for global dominance. And is this particular article not about global military dominance?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley So basically they use "Pearl Harbour" in one context, therefore they use it the same in the sentence I'm talking about? And what do they mean by "cataclysing"? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley And we are of course only talking about one document out of dozens the PNAC and their members/supporters have produced outlining their plans. You might wanna read the Present Danger as well, or the letter they sent to Clinton begging him to invade Iraq. The article I posted above is purely about reshaping US military. There are articles and documents covering all aspects of their plans for global dominance. And is this particular article not about global military dominance? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN yes. there are two references to pearl harbour in that entire document and they both sound the same to me. meh. i dont care. all i am arguing is that your comment regarding pearl harbour in the context of this particular document is unfounded and innaccurate/dishonest and makes you sound like one of those 9/11 nutjobs. |
Why shouldnt the figures be examined. After all it is "us" pushing for freedom and reform in the middle east.
They are simply excersing their rights.
What more is, ive read alot of evidence to support the claim that the figures are a farse so why not allow a group of people to examine the evidence and allow others to make their own mind up.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley Er maybe you misunderstand what I meant by it? I am not in no way or shape inplying the American government had anything to do with the attacks, just that they are using the attacks to further their neoconservative agenda which they were unable to pursue prior to the attacks... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by George Smiley which they drew up in 2000 to secure American military and economic global domination. It's all there in black and white explaining how they will be unable to muster public support without a tragic event like Pearle Harbour. |
George it is realy not possible to compare the propoganda and brainwashing that little kids go through in Iran to what USA does to gain support for war in Iraq. US goverment doesn't brainwash its children. and like I said in this thread, kids in Israel learn in schools about peace and sing songs about peace. Arab kids are brainwahed with hatred.
I
I saw these and almost died laughing..... hope they come out
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.