| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
More of this. And remember, this is the same regime that went to the U.N. over Hillary's pledge to "obliterate" Iran in the event that it attacked Israel with nuclear weapons.
"Ahmadinejad says Israel doomed," by Ali Akbar Dareini for the Associated Press, May 14:
TEHRAN, Iran - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday that Israel is dying and that its 60th anniversary celebrations are an attempt to prevent its "annihilation."
He spoke hours after President Bush arrived in Israel for the anniversary celebrations.
"The Zionist (Israeli) regime is dying," said Ahmadinejad during a speech in northern Iran. "The criminals assume that by holding celebrations ... they can save the sinister Zionist regime from death and annihilation."
Ahmadinejad used an Arabic word, ismihlal, that can also be translated as destruction, death and collapse.
Iran doesn't recognize Israel, and Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for Israel's destruction. Threatening exchanges between Iran and Israel have intensified since 2005, when Ahmadinejad said in a speech that Israel will one day be "wiped off the map." The Iranian leader has also described the Holocaust as a "myth."
"Nations of the region hate this criminal fabricated regime (Israel) and will uproot this fabricated regime if the smallest and shortest opportunity is given to them," Ahmadinejad said Wednesday in an address broadcast live on state television.
Israel considers Iran a serious threat because of its support for Hamas and Hezbollah militants, its nuclear program and its arsenal of long-range missiles, which can be fitted with nuclear warheads and are capable of striking the Jewish state.
Tehran is equipped with Shahab-3 missiles, which have a range of up to 1,250 miles. Israel is about 625 miles west of Iran.
Israel and the U.S. accuse Iran of using its nuclear program as a cover for a weapons program. Iran has denied the charges, saying its nuclear program is geared merely toward generating electricity, not bomb making.
Israel is widely believed to have a large stockpile of nuclear weapons, but follows a policy it calls "nuclear ambiguity" and has never acknowledged or denied having a nuclear weapons program.
Iranian military officials have warned Israel in recent years that Iran would destroy Israel's Dimona nuclear reactor if the Jewish state were to attack Iranian nuclear facilities.
Posted by Marisol at May 14, 2008 12:03 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
They don't call him MadMood AhmaNutJob for nothing.
Posted by: Quantum Infidel![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 14, 2008 12:23 PM
The sooner this snake's fangs are removed the better. The only problem will be the howls and simpering from the media and the gang at the UN with its annex, the "International Court of Justice in the Hague". If it weren't for these troublemakers the nuke sites could be bombed and then bombed again and again until the collapse of a regime destroyed by its own recklessness and megalomania. But what will happen when the term "war criminals" is uttered in the Hague and is broadcast non-stop worldwide? When the fifth columns all over the West do their bit to discredit an attack on Iran? What if gasoline prices shoot much higher as a result of an attack? Is there the will and the political savvy in the US or in Israel to see this through? I'm not sure at all. But Iran must be dealt with decisively no matter what -- and it must be done soon. What other choice is there?
Posted by: Rahman bin Rahman at May 14, 2008 12:42 PM
Israel and the U.S. accuse Iran of using its nuclear program as a cover for a weapons program. Iran has denied the charges, saying its nuclear program is geared merely toward generating electricity, not bomb making.
To paraphrase Wayne Campbell:
"Iran's nuclear program MIGHT be geared toward generating electricity (and not bomb making) ... yeah, and monkeys MIGHT fly out of my butt!"
Posted by: Lori B. at May 14, 2008 12:42 PM
Gee, somebody PUHLEEZE put us all out of this misery of having to listen to this guy anymore.
One would hope the Mossad have plans....
Posted by: gymgal at May 14, 2008 1:00 PM
Israel (with complete and open support from the United States) should move to have Iran expelled from the United Nations for calling for the elimination of a fellow state from the face of the earth. Now, most in the gutless and corrupt (morally as well as financially) UN won't like this but it would be interesting to see how nations across the world line up on this proposal. What the hell, the UN is a a moral cesspool and circus anyway, why not do it to call all the bastards and cowards out? Might as well have some fun from time to time at useless nations' headquarters.
Posted by: Wellington at May 14, 2008 1:04 PM
I am still optimistic that sometime in the not too distant future the U.S. or Israel is going to take out the Iranian nuke facility. I don't know whether GW has the balls for it anymore, and if Obama is at the helm, it won't be the U.S. ... at that point I am still betting Israel comes through, yet again.
Whoever comes after Olmert will not feel compelled to get permission to survive from GW/Condi Rice/ or Obama.
Posted by: Paleologos at May 14, 2008 1:08 PM
What about that Thousand Year Reich? How's that coming along?
How about "look upon my works and despair"?
Hubris? Oh, that's a western idea........Sorry.
Here, Thug-in-Chief, let me explain. The State of Israel will probably be around longer than you. The Israelis have a modern state which grants more rights to its Muslim citizens that your Islamic republic...................Oh, you're right, another western idea. Well, even if you judge by Islam Jihads of the Past, you are lagging in that area as well.
Face it, even as a totalitarian dictator/religious bigot you are not doing that well.
Posted by: tanstaafl at May 14, 2008 2:00 PM
I thought Ineedajob made himself clear the other day. A Runt with a big mouth.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at May 14, 2008 5:07 PM
Ahmadinejad, the Dead Terrorist.
Posted by: Lex at May 14, 2008 8:16 PM
Israel (with complete and open support from the United States) should move to have Iran expelled from the United Nations for calling for the elimination of a fellow state from the face of the earth.
Wellington,
Don't stop there. The US should withdraw its own membership from the UN and cite Iran's action as the reason. Don't build a new HQ. When the building they are in right now crumbles, send them packing. Manhattan is prime real estate and we can't fill it up with diplomats who don't pay their parking tickets. Geneva already has facilities for them. It's their second home.
A little icing on the cake will be the money we save in dues and supporting many UN organizations. There's a recession in the US. Got to tighten the belt a little, and reduce or eliminate UNNECESSARY spending.
at May 14, 2008 10:32 PM
PMK: Agreed. American withdrawal from the Useless Nations organization would be a dream come true. As for where it could set up shop then, Geneva would be good enough but I like earlier suggestions made by some here at JW. They included Gaza, Pyongyang and Mogadishu. What the hell, the inmates already run the asylum, so why not have headquarters in the heart of the mayhem portion of the world.
Posted by: Wellington at May 15, 2008 6:36 AM
Wellington,
I suggested Geneva only because it already has a UN facility, which I've seen. That facility's availability means that the UN can't claim homelessness if we evict them.
Switzerland (a beautiful country) fancies itself as above taking sides and so is a neutral spot for meetings. Eurasian and African leaders would find it easy to get to. It could serve as an interim meeting place (as it would have if Atta had targeted the NYC HQ on 9/11) while the new one was being built somewhere in the other hemisphere, be that eastern or southern.
at May 15, 2008 1:01 PM
Although moving the UN to Geneva might remove an irritation from us, it would be doing a distinct disservice to the Swiss. It would also mean that Europe would become the center of International Diplomacy. I'm not sure this would be a good thing.
The Alaskans limited the opportunities of state officials to create mischief by putting their state capital in Juneau, a cold and rainy island that is reachable only by boat and airplane. How about putting the UN on a small island somewhere that is relatively outside the immediate influence of any proximate state?
Posted by: Eastview at May 15, 2008 2:33 PM
Eastview,
The UN is already in Geneva. The Swiss accepted it long ago. It doesn't sit empty. It's a functioning site. Switzerland has hosted intl diplomacy for decades.
Europe is already the center of international diplomacy. You have the ICC and much more all located in The Hague. The EU is looking to become a mover and shaker. Let them. Very little gets done on the East River, other than eating in the restaurants. It's time for someone else to host the party. The real action is in Washington and Europe.
at May 15, 2008 9:08 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)