Der mann, vor dem die Welt sich fürchtet

[pieter]

Every now and then I like to buy a foreign quility newspaper,
to have a more objective, international view on things.
This week I bought the German der Spiegel, which has the
Iranian president on it's cover.
A team of SPIEGEL-redacteure visited the Iranian president
in his palace and asked him questions from a German
historical and contemporay point of view. It was very interesting to read it.
The conversation was about the Holocaust, the future of the state of Israel,
about the failure of America in Iraq and Teherans claim on Nucelar
technology. Here is the English translation;

SPIEGEL INTERVIEW WITH IRAN'S PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD

"We Are Determined"

In an interview with SPIEGEL, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad discusses the Holocaust, the future of the state of Israel, mistakes made by the United States in Iraq and Tehran's nuclear dispute with the West.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: "By siding with Iran, the Europeans would serve their own and our interests."
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, you are a soccer fan and you like to play soccer. Will you be sitting in the stadium in Nuremberg on June 11, when the Iranian national team plays against Mexico in Germany?
Ahmadinejad: It depends. Naturally, I'll be watching the game in any case. I don't know yet whether I'll be at home in front of the television set or somewhere else. My decision depends upon a number of things.

SPIEGEL: For example?

Ahmadinejad: How much time I have, how the state of various relationships are going, whether I feel like it and a number of other things.

SPIEGEL: There was great indignation in Germany when it became known that you might be coming to the soccer world championship. Did that surprise you?

Ahmadinejad: No, that's not important. I didn't even understand how that came about. It also had no meaning for me. I don't know what all the excitement is about.

SPIEGEL: It concerned your remarks about the Holocaust. It was inevitable that the Iranian president's denial of the systematic murder of the Jews by the Germans would trigger outrage.

Ahmadinejad: I don't exactly understand the connection.

SPIEGEL: First you make your remarks about the Holocaust. Then comes the news that you may travel to Germany -- this causes an uproar. So you were surprised after all?

Ahmadinejad: No, not at all, because the network of Zionism is very active around the world, in Europe too. So I wasn't surprised. We were addressing the German people. We have nothing to do with Zionists.
SPIEGEL: Denying the Holocaust is punishable in Germany. Are you indifferent when confronted with so much outrage?

Ahmadinejad: I know that DER SPIEGEL is a respected magazine. But I don't know whether it is possible for you to publish the truth about the Holocaust. Are you permitted to write everything about it?

SPIEGEL: Of course we are entitled to write about the findings of the past 60 years' historical research. In our view there is no doubt that the Germans -- unfortunately -- bear the guilt for the murder of 6 million Jews.

Ahmadinejad: Well, then we have stirred up a very concrete discussion. We are posing two very clear questions. The first is: Did the Holocaust actually take place? You answer this question in the affirmative. So, the second question is: Whose fault was it? The answer to that has to be found in Europe and not in Palestine. It is perfectly clear: If the Holocaust took place in Europe, one also has to find the answer to it in Europe.

On the other hand, if the Holocaust didn't take place, why then did this regime of occupation ...

SPIEGEL: ... You mean the state of Israel...

Ahmadinejad: ... come about? Why do the European countries commit themselves to defending this regime? Permit me to make one more point. We are of the opinion that, if an historical occurrence conforms to the truth, this truth will be revealed all the more clearly if there is more research into it and more discussion about it.

SPIEGEL: That has long since happened in Germany.

Ahmadinejad: We don't want to confirm or deny the Holocaust. We oppose every type of crime against any people. But we want to know whether this crime actually took place or not. If it did, then those who bear the responsibility for it have to be punished, and not the Palestinians. Why isn't research into a deed that occurred 60 years ago permitted? After all, other historical occurrences, some of which lie several thousand years in the past, are open to research, and even the governments support this.

SPIEGEL: Mr. President, with all due respect, the Holocaust occurred, there were concentration camps, there are dossiers on the extermination of the Jews, there has been a great deal of research, and there is neither the slightest doubt about the Holocaust nor about the fact - we greatly regret this - that the Germans are responsible for it. If we may now add one remark: the fate of the Palestinians is an entirely different issue, and this brings us into the present.

Ahmadinejad: No, no, the roots of the Palestinian conflict must be sought in history. The Holocaust and Palestine are directly connected with one another. And if the Holocaust actually occurred, then you should permit impartial groups from the whole world to research this. Why do you restrict the research to a certain group? Of course, I don't mean you, but rather the European governments.

SPIEGEL: Are you still saying that the Holocaust is just "a myth?"

Ahmadinejad: I will only accept something as truth if I am actually convinced of it.

SPIEGEL: Even though no Western scholars harbor any doubt about the Holocaust?

Ahmadinejad: But there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part. Hence, an impartial group has to come together to investigate and to render an opinion on this very important subject, because the clarification of this issue will contribute to the solution of global problems. Under the pretext of the Holocaust, a very strong polarization has taken place in the world and fronts have been formed. It would therefore be very good if an international and impartial group looked into the matter in order to clarify it once and for all. Normally, governments promote and support the work of researchers on historical events and do not put them in prison.
SPIEGEL: Who is that supposed to be? Which researchers do you mean?

Ahmadinejad: You would know this better than I; you have the list. There are people from England, from Germany, France and from Australia.

SPIEGEL: You presumably mean, for example, the Englishman David Irving, the German-Canadian Ernst Zündel, who is on trial in Mannheim, and the Frenchman Georges Theil, all of whom deny the Holocaust.

Ahmadinejad: The mere fact that my comments have caused such strong protests, although I'm not a European, and also the fact that I have been compared with certain persons in German history indicates how charged with conflict the atmosphere for research is in your country. Here in Iran you needn't worry.

SPIEGEL: Well, we are conducting this historical debate with you for a very timely purpose. Are you questioning Israel's right to exist?

Ahmadinejad: Look here, my views are quite clear. We are saying that if the Holocaust occurred, then Europe must draw the consequences and that it is not Palestine that should pay the price for it. If it did not occur, then the Jews have to go back to where they came from. I believe that the German people today are also prisoners of the Holocaust. Sixty million people died in the Second World War. World War II was a gigantic crime. We condemn it all. We are against bloodshed, regardless of whether a crime was committed against a Muslim or against a Christian or a Jew. But the question is: Why among these 60 million victims are only the Jews the center of attention?

SPIEGEL: That's just not the case. All peoples mourn the victims claimed by the Second World War, Germans and Russians and Poles and others as well. Yet, we as Germans cannot absolve ourselves of a special guilt, namely for the systematic murder of the Jews. But perhaps we should now move on to the next subject.

Ahmadinejad: No, I have a question for you. What kind of a role did today's youth play in World War II?

SPIEGEL: None.

Ahmadinejad: Why should they have feelings of guilt toward Zionists? Why should the costs of the Zionists be paid out of their pockets? If people committed crimes in the past, then they would have to have been tried 60 years ago. End of story! Why must the German people be humiliated today because a group of people committed crimes in the name of the Germans during the course of history?

SPIEGEL: The German people today can't do anything about it. But there is a sort of collective shame for those deeds done in the German name by our fathers or grandfathers.

Ahmadinejad: How can a person who wasn't even alive at the time be held legally responsible?

SPIEGEL: Not legally but morally.

Ahmadinejad: Why is such a burden heaped on the German people? The German people of today bear no guilt. Why are the German people not permitted the right to defend themselves? Why are the crimes of one group emphasized so greatly, instead of highlighting the great German cultural heritage? Why should the Germans not have the right to express their opinion freely?

SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we are well aware that German history is not made up of only the 12 years of the Third Reich. Nevertheless, we have to accept that horrible crimes have been committed in the German name. We also own up to this, and it is a great achievement of the Germans in post-war history that they have grappled critically with their past.

Ahmadinejad: Are you also prepared to tell that to the German people?

SPIEGEL: Oh yes, we do that.

For the rest of the interview:
service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,418660,00.html

[kaima]

Pieter,

Your reference URL broke at the comma, so it must be cut and pasted, or you can go to www.tinyurl.com , paste it and get

tinyurl.com/lzvgw

Thanks for posting the article !

Kai

[pieter]

kaima said:

Pieter,

Your reference URL broke at the comma, so it must be cut and pasted, or you can go to www.tinyurl.com , paste it and get

tinyurl.com/lzvgw

Thanks for posting the article !

Kai

You are right kaima. thanks for your url.

[bescheid]

Pieter

First of all, thank you for presenting to light, this prospective from the publication of, Der Spiegel, is a universal respected publication. It is good to receive a differant prospective of a common subject. And with this matter, it was with the new President of Iran.

Most parties of a common interest will by default, create a diffirent view point by interest that is most benificial towards thier individual agendas. In other words, it is not truth that is the subject matter, for truth is what is most benificial to the beholder. Justice is what is most benifitial to the conquireier.

In this case, it is the prospective of: {Impathic Understanding}. Each side is bound by thier own agenda of responsiblities to the office they hold, and to the people they represent. This regaurdless of the agendas held by others.

The question of: A common concept of the understanding in the eyes of Western minds, is the Iraian denial of the Holicaust and of the existance of Israel as a nation in Palistien.

What is actually meant is this: The arrival of the Israelies into the land they now occupie, was gained by the dispalcement of the people previously living on this land. And as such, would be defined as an illegal act of invasion and occupation.

Whilst this concept is very easly understood by most with knowledge of the Middle Eastern Early to recent history. It other wise has a tendency to be confusing with seporate mindsets of interfacing communication.

What is remarkable is: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad knows and understand this. It is a problem of accurate interpersonal communication and the break down of such. The problem he is experiencing is this: How to bring this break down of communication into a proper light of understanding, with so many mind sets previously made up, and not willing to consider the Iranian side in the communication loop.

Very seldom is a people tolally a victim people, there is a reason for every thing. In the case of the Israelie military, there is a truth to be told, but, not to deaf ears of the previouse five wars.

Charles

[piwo]

The German people of today bear no guilt. Why are the German people not permitted the right to defend themselves? Why are the crimes of one group emphasized so greatly, instead of highlighting the great German cultural heritage? Why should the Germans not have the right to express their opinion freely?

I find it interesting that 99% of all the excuses for turmoil in the Mid east is conjured up from historical acts, yet now this gentlemen purports that history doesn't mean anything... Having one's cake and eating it too so to speak.

[bescheid]

{I find it interesting that 99% of all the excuses for turmoil in the Mid east is conjured up from historical acts, yet now this gentlemen purports that history doesn't mean anything... Having one's cake and eating it too so to speak.}

Piwo

I have not the answers of your question, nor any thing out standing to add.

The Middle East is history, the people living there are a part of this history and must by default, live it out.

I would only say of this of blaime. If any one person would be responsible, then it would be the father of the Arabs, Abraham and the slave of his wife Sara, that of Hagar. For between them {Abraham and Hagar} they made to be, Ishmael. From that point on, they Hagar and Ishmael were made to be out cast. {this is all in the Bible} From then on to the present, we of the known world, have had nothing but trouble from the decendents of Ishmael.

Charles

[pieter]

bescheid said:

{I find it interesting that 99% of all the excuses for turmoil in the Mid east is conjured up from historical acts, yet now this gentlemen purports that history doesn't mean anything... Having one's cake and eating it too so to speak.}

Piwo

I have not the answers of your question, nor any thing out standing to add.

The Middle East is history, the people living there are a part of this history and must by default, live it out.

I would only say of this of blaime. If any one person would be responsible, then it would be the father of the Arabs, Abraham and the slave of his wife Sara, that of Hagar. For between them {Abraham and Hagar} they made to be, Ishmael. From that point on, they Hagar and Ishmael were made to be out cast. {this is all in the Bible} From then on to the present, we of the known world, have had nothing but trouble from the decendents of Ishmael.

Charles

Bescheid,

Abraham, had great difficulty sending Hagar and Ishmael into the desert, due to
the pressure of the jealous wife Sara, whith whom he got Isac, the forfather
of the jews. But the bible also says, out of Ishmael will grow a great people,
the later Arab bedouin tribes of the Arab peninsula.

I agree with Piwo, that the Iranians and the Arabs twist history for their own
benefit. They always see one side, and always keep silent about their part
of history. Their centery old internal bloody struggle, the ongoing bloodshed
between the Arab tribes (they did not need to have tiny Israel fro that).
The Arab intolerance and opression of minorities in their midst, Sunni's
opressing Shia's and Shia's opressing Sunni's (in Iran, Iraq and Lebanon),
and their treatment of Christians, Jews and Kurds as second class citizens.
Israeli's I see no differant from other settlers in the world, Americans and
Canadians on native American land; Sapniards, Portugese and Dutch
on South-American soil; The Dutch, French and German settlers in South-Africa
who merged into the Afrikaander tribe, and the British settlers and soldiers
that came after that in the 19th and 20th century.
The Austrailians, New Sealanders, Germans in Namibia, the French in their
colonies (North-Africa has a french culture and language, because of that),
British Rhodesia (the problems in Zimbabwe have their roots in that;
although I hate Mugabe and have sympathy for the White farmers who
made a coaltion with their black workers who are opressed nowadays),
The Russification policy in many former Non-Russian Sovjet states,
the Ukrainianisation and Sovjetization of former East-Poland, and the
Polonization of former East-German land (of the territory of the former
Weimar republic which became the Third Reich).
Croatia taking the autonomous Serbain region - Republic of Serbian Krajina -
in it's country, after ethnic cleansing.

In my view Zionism, Jewish nationalism and the militairy side of it stems
from the influence of European 19th century nationalism, the Colonial
examples of Great-Britain, France and the Ottoman empire (Israeli law
is partly stil based on Ottoman law), the relgious bond with the land
of Israel (mount Zion), and a Jewish Socialist collectivist ideal for a
Socialist Jewsish state. There are many kinds of Zionism.

The return of the people to the land of the forfathers has something like
a national phenomenon, people from the 12 lost tribes start returning to
the land of their Semitic roots.
Turks, British, Arab countries, Persians and Sovjets could not stop their
willpower and relgious and ideological motivated return to a country
where they can live among their own people, being a majority in the
first time in 2000 years. This ethnic component, with religious, cultural
and social foundation, makes that people go to that country, even
when they know of the danger of war and terrorism.
Someone who isn't Jewish or knows a lot about Judaism can not understand
how important that country is for them, that they have one of the strongest
armies in the world (and that that army connects everybody to everybody
in that society), that their patriotism or Nationalism is one of the strongest
in the world (comparable to the palestinian Nationalism of both Fatah and
Hamas). That a majority of the Israeli's is pro-segregation with the Arabs,
and even for a transfer of the Israeli Arabs to the West-bank, Gaza and
Jordan. Their relgious and social-cultural and economical segegation
in Europe has made that they have a very strong ethnic and national
identity, and a profound feeling of being differant than the other peoples
of the world. This is why they are such tough (Sabra; a Jew born in Israel,
after the fruit of the Prickly pear cactus) people.
If you realise that their religious culture is based on the Old testamony,
the Pentateuch or Torah, and the discussions and debates about it between
many generations of Rabbi's in the Talmud, and the oral tradition of the
Midrash, than you can understand their attitude towards the Goyim
(non-jews) in general and the Palestinian Arabs in particular.
They are incredibly happy that after centuries of Progroms in Europe,
the Holocaust and the Hebron massacre of 1929 (Arab progrom on jews)
they managed to organise a strong army, who kicked the Arabs out time
after time. Even the Poles cheered in 1968 when their "Polish jews"
defeated the Sovjet backed Arabs in that year.

In the Netherlands it is nearly impossible to talk about the Middle-East,
Israel or Palestine, because it easily ends in a very tense or fierce debate,
which can end in a quarrel. It has to do with the feeling of collective
guilt, because many Dutch collaborated with the Germans in removing
the Dutch jews from their home, arresting them, and transporting them
for the German nazi's. From the other side the Left is very Pro-Palestinian.
And the jews are devided into two camps, the Nationalistic rightwing
camp, the Peacenik Left (often affiliated with Palestinians in Peace
initiatives, and very critical towards Israel), a third party is more silent,
the Neutral (Ultra) Orthodox who is only concentrated on religious affairs.
Many christians are Pro-Israel like in the USA, so our Christian-democrats,
and two small Protestant (Biblical/Evangelic and Reformatorian) christian
parties are Pro-Israel (I voted for one of them out of social-economical
and ethical reason). The Social-democratic and Liberal parties are more
neutral, like the German, French and British political parties.
Today the European Union, countries and the USA isolate the Palestinian
government, because it is a terrorist organisation.
What worries me is that there seems to be no Moderate wing on the
Palestinian side, the Secular Nationalist Fatah is full of terror movements,
Hamas is a terrorist organisation (which gets the support of both Iran
and Saoudi Arabia), and then there are the radical left factions, which
have the same terror policy as their Hamas and Fatah brethern.
Count to that the Israeli settler extremists who harass Palestinian
school children, women, elderly people and farmers on their own land,
roads, schools and even houses. You have a miserable and hopeless
situation, in which only the right of the strongest works.

Pieter

[bescheid]

pieter

I do understand yours and Piwo point of Arabs using history to suit what ever agenda is theirs at the moment of their choosing. It is simply what it is, saber rattleing with words.

To understand, it is imparative to use,"Impathic Understanding".

Using a generalized term of Arabs, they have a tendency to take the easy way out of most conflicts that may draw them into, they are not cowards, it is just their way.

But, not so the Iranians and Syrians. They generally have a different mind set. In effect, the Arab familys do not wish to attract a problem with those two nations and above all, Israel.

In this case, it is the Iranians that have brought tension into the Middle East with their intent to maintain a nuclear development programme. With this programme, has brought to the forefront, the weaknesses of each of these kingdoms. If perchance, the Iranians do develope a nuclear weapon, then it would be ecombent upon them to equally arm them selves with such a weapon (most probably they would purchase fully developed such weapons from Pakistan).

It is as of one Arab tribe has suddenly the bigger and faster camel. Now the remainder are no longer equal in status, so they must spend out of the family bank, money to purchase an equally quick camel.

The same with weapons.

A tribe can shoot and eat a camel, but, not weapons.

Israel is the winner on this situation. For Iran has ineffect, polorized the situation in the Middle East. The Arabs can simply stand by as they do best, and wirl about their worry beads. For the agressive Iranians have done what they do best, make a dust storm out of a simple wirl wind. And it is a gamble, {then what is not a gamble in life}, if they do the game correctly, they will win concessions with the European and American states in such a manner as not dreamed of in the pay as you go world.

With the Palistinians placed in a difficult postion by The wild state ments of Iranian leadership, the palistinins will do what they do best, complain and do their work as they are told to do. And that is work with Israel to settle their differences. Then, they may begin once more, the border crossing to their jobs in Israel.

The following is a url created by the news agency of CBS using information out of Egypt.

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/28/ap/world/mainD8DGOJEG2.shtml

And yourself and piwo are correct with your assessments.

It was a mistake in judgement of some of those wild remarks of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But, these situations as vile as they are, tend to bring together various powers inspite of differences.

Charles