Iran’s Supreme Leader says Israel is “satanic and cancerous”

[democratic]

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7926

Tehran, Iran, Jul. 16 – Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei described Israel on Sunday as “satanic and cancerous” and praised the Lebanese group Hezbollah for its “jihad” against the Jewish state.

“This regime is an infectious tumour for the entire Islamic world”, Khamenei said in a speech that was aired on state television.

He rejected the demand by U.S. President George W. Bush that Hezbollah disarm, vowing, “This will never happen”.

[still_one]

1. resolution 1559

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sc8181.doc.htm

3. Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias;

[IndianaGreen]

23. Let's do UN Resolution 242 first!

Hearing Israel demand compliance for UN resolutions is like hearing Carlo Gambino accuse Albert Anastasia of being a gangster.

[saigon68]

26. LOL

[still_one]

32. interesting since the thread was about Iran and Hezbolah comments

It is also interesting that you seem to equate that I am speaking for Israel. LET ME SET IT STRAIGHT FOR YOU, I AM AN AMERICAN FIRST, LAST, AND ALWAYS, AND I SPEAK ONLY FOR MYSELF!!!!!!!

[hlthe2b]

2. bad translation.... he meant Cheney

:eyes:

[ladjf]

3. That boy really knows how to "smooth the waters". I wish to hell

he'd keep his trap shut. It's like he's working for Bush.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. The Ayatollah does not speak for all Muslims

We are told in the Qur'an to honor all those of the Book, and that includes Jews. As long as the government of Israel allows Muslims to practice their religion, there is no reason for jihad.

"One who suffers oppression and forgives the oppressor is the most favored for aid from God."

"Be kind to people whether they deserve your kindness or not. If your kindness reaches the deserving, good for you; if your kindess reaches the undeserving, take joy in your compassion."

"Oh God, bring peacefulness among us, bring unity into our hearts; guide us to equilibrium, take us from darkness to light and away from ugliness; bless our ears, our eye, our hearts, and our families; accept our repentence."

All the above are sayings of the Prophet (pbuh), copied from "Essential Sufism"

[still_one]

5. even the Sunni or the Shia do not agree

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. not to mention the Sufi

:)

[still_one]

9. I prefer Rodney Kings philosophy:

"why can't we all just get along?"

[wellst0nev0ter]

43. Don't Forget The Kharmathians, Or Kharijites

or the fact that the fundamentalist political Islam we all know and love today was founded by an opportunistic atheist.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[still_one]

10. and Christians are told to turn the other check

but most do not

[CatholicEdHead]

21. That saying has more to it than is usually thought about

http://www.flick.com/~liralen/faith/cheek.html

Let's add a little history. In Jesus' time, the left hand was unclean, used for things that toilet paper is used for today, it wasn't used for much of anything else, if it could be helped. Therefore, in order for someone to have gotten hit on the right cheek by someone facing them, the striker would have had to have used the back of the hand.

A back of the hand blow was a blow that signified the punishment of a child, a woman, or a slave, all of which, in that era and time, were second class citizens. Lower than the lowest man of that time. To be hit that way implied an insult, a degradation.

To turn the other cheek, then, was an implied demand for acknowlegement of equalness. To get hit on the left cheek with the right hand required, first, that the striker acknowledge the striken as something that wasn't of a lower class, wasn't dirt beneath his heels but a real man. Second, it does imply that one shouldn't return bad for bad, violence for violence.

In many ways, it's a lesson of assertiveness versus agressiveness. It is not a lesson that advocates passivity in the face of abuse. Protect your own rights and priviledges without destroying anothers. It's a good balance, too many people can be badly agressive, destroying other people's peace, property or rights in the pursuit of their own. That's wrong. Assertiveness is the protection of your own without hurting anyone else.

[still_one]

35. It has to do with NON-VIOLENT resistence

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.”

Matthew 5:38-48

I am not a Christian, but that is how I see it

[PsychoDad]

48. Thank you for sharing that.

It's very interesting to learn that.

Peace.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. Not by Sufi definition

My lineage is one that comes from India, and so I'd think they would know. Sufis say "the Book" involves any holy book, including "the sacred manuscript of Nature"(# of Ten Sufi Thoughts by Haz. Inayat Khan). One of my daily prayers includes the words:

"Allow us to recognize Thee in all Thy Holy Names and Forms:
As Rama, as Krishna, as Shiva, as Buddha.
Let us know Thee as Abraham, as Solomon, as Zarathustra, as Moses, as Jesus, as Mohammed, and in many other names and forms, known and unknown to the world...." (Prayer Salat, which can be found at http://www.churchofall.us/prayers.html)

[PsychoDad]

47. No.

Muslims are instructed in the Quran to treat everyone fairly, justly and with respect. Be those Jews, Christians, Hindus, or Atheist.

Muslims are given permission to fight only to defend themselves or their property, not to propagate the faith or to take what by right belongs to another.

The Quran tells us that we Muslims must respect the right of others to believe as they will and forbids us from forceful conversion. Sura 255: "There is no compulsion in religion."

Indeed, In the end we will be judged upon how we treated other human beings.

Peace.

[democratic]

8. .

That's true. Khamenei is only a mid-ranking ayatollah. Montazeri who is a Grand Ayatollah and is under house arrest has consistently spoken against terrorism, hostage-taking, honor killing - he promotes democracy, human rights through the koran.

[Igel]

18. Call him a non-Muslim, or apostate.

Otherwise, be a fellow-traveller.

I agree: As long as the government of Israel allows Muslims to practice their religion--some would add, proselytize--there is no reason for jihad.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

49. Interesting that you would say Muslims proselytize

because for Sufis, at least, that is forbidden and actually is repugnant.

[struggle4progress]

12. This is the continuing blowback from our overthrow of Mossadegh's

government in 1953, just as the Taliban was blowback from our support of Jeanne Kirkpatrick's beloved majahideen in Afghanistan. And fifty years from now, America will still be experiencing blowback from "George's Excellent Adventure" in Iraq ...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

13. Those who don't learn from history

are doomed to repeat it. And those who act without thought to the future often doom the future to war and more war.

[goforit]

16. This is the terrorism Bush/Cheney have always wished for. Now that

they've created real terrorists,these new offspring will come out of the woodwork.
Who and where will they attack? New York? NOT! New York despises Bush/Cheney.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AnOhioan]

15. You have not read ANY of the reasoned posts in this

thread, have you?? You sir, need to educate yourself.

[Mr Friendly]

17. I don't think it's over until

somebody wins and somebody loses.

Do you want the Islamists to win? Then women can't drive cars and they
have to cover their faces when they go out in public.

[MissB]

19. Wow, I thought that was the goal of the Religious Right in *our* country.

Funny, all religious wingnuts are dangerous. Not just the ones in the Middle East.

[AnOhioan]

20. Nobody wins in this situation

Everytime someone tries to "win" the stage is set for a new conflict. History bears this out. You cannot defeat fundie thinking, be it Muslim or Christian, by blowing things up and killing people. Why is this fact not clear?!?!

[Nevernose]

22. So how DO we defeat it?

If you could tell me that, I will personally send your name off to the Nobel people. Seriously (not about the award, but the question).

Israel gave back Gaza and the Golan. So, I, like most people in Israel, Lebanon, and Gaza, wonder why the hell the Gaza branch of Hamas and Hezbollah keep shooting rockets and killing soldiers in Israel. And then we wonder why, when Israel has a superior moral hand in this dealing of the cards, do they scrwe it up by blowing up power stations, bridges, and airports?

It's been 58 years and violence hasn't worked for EITHER SIDE in all that time. All anyone gets is more violence. So how to defeat the Israeli "persecution complex" and the radical "Muslim" fanatics?

At this point, all I can do is look on the bright side and say, "hell, at least they ain't killing each other more than usual in the West Bank."

[daleo]

24. Trouble is, war has worked for some people

At any given time in history, the rich usually do all right and war can be quite profitable.

At any given time in history, political leaders usually do all right and nationalistic war can be quite a loyalty builder.

At any given time in history, established religious leaders usually do all right and religious war can be quite a religious recruitment tool.

[Nevernose]

25. Are you suggesting a healthy dose of anarcho-socialism?

Might be the cure?

[daleo]

27. I don't really think anarchism is workable

I suppose war will always be with us, but some things seem to help:

- education (helps with religious fanatasism, at least sometimes).
- social democracy (helps control greed and desparation a bit).
- small families (makes people less willing to send their children off to war).

I wish I knew the answer to war.

[Nevernose]

36. Okay, maybe in this case I AM suggesting anarcho-socialism

Not anarchy, but anarchistic-socialism (like the Greens). Maybe when the average folks in the area wake up and realized that they are being used by power-mongers, things will be different. A worker in Israel has a lot more in common with a worker in Gaza than he has diffrences.

Although, to be fair, in my original post I siad that it is my honest belief that MOST people in the region don't want violence of any kind. People who elected Hamas or Olmert? Stupid. Most of them don't WANT violence, however, they were just stupid enough to vote for who they did. Kind of like us.

[IndianaGreen]

28. Israel has not given back the Golan!

Get your facts straight, or get a map!

[Nevernose]

34. Check your internal bias meter.

Everything I wrote was directed equally to both sides in the latest conflict.

As far as the Shebaa Farms area is concerned, the Lebanese government, the Israeli government, and every other government on Planet Earth consider it to be part of Syria, who don't want to risk another losing direct war with Israel and thus leave it to their proxy warriors.

Hezbollah's stated mission is the complete, total destruction of Israel and the death of all Jews. The Golan is irrelevgant to them. They're as equidistant from "innocent" as the Israelis and their considerations of "cilviian vs. military" are.

AGAIN: you're good at blaming the Israelis, as good as many here are at blaming Arabs. But what is your rational, reasonable, pragmatic solution?

[AnOhioan]

29. Well, for starters.....

We (referring to the US and to a lesser extent, Europe) can, instead of selling arms to every country that asks, start spending money wisely, to influence educational systems, food distribution systems, basic infrastructure, medical facilities, and the like.

We can stop pretending we own the planet and stop the coercion, the facilitation of yet more violence.

We can truly be a world leader in so many areas that we have failed miserably in during our history.

Of course that requires getting our own fundies out of the halls of Congress and the White House.

I am not saying we can have a perfect world tomorrow, or even in our lifetimes, that is not realistic in any way, shape or form, but we can take the initial steps.

Terrorism and fundamentalism have their roots in poverty, in powerlessness, in colonialism. The roots are formed when people feel they have no choice, no options.

Alleviate human tragedies as best we can and we simultaneously can make progress in alleviating the fundamentalism that plagues the major western religions.

Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faiths all have adherents who distort the teachings, as does the Hindi faith. Frankly, Eastern faiths such as Buddhism are less likely to spawn the evil that is so apparent in todays headlines, but that is for another thread.

I do not have all the answers but I do know, unequivocally, that trying to "beat" terrorism and fundamentalism with guns and bombs just exacerbates the problem.

Let me finish by mentioning a quote from your post;

" And then we wonder why, when Israel has a superior moral hand in this dealing of the cards..."


Israel does not have the moral upper hand....no one does in this conflict.

[MoseyWalker]

30. Minds with religion at the forefront

seldom know how to deal with genuine, real problems of life that occur.

They like to think so, but damn if they don't fuck up things every time.

[Patchuli]

42. Great observation

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Nevernose]

33. The operative words in your quote were "in THIS dealing of the cards."

The G8 seems to think so, as do Egypt, Arabia, and Jordan. When the first soldier was kidnapped, Israel had an upper moral hand. I wasn't talking about The Conflict -- as in the last 150 years -- but just in terms of the latest conflict. I've written on many previous occasions that the ultimate tragedy is that both sides are right, and both sides are wrong.

We (referring to the US and to a lesser extent, Europe) can, instead of selling arms to every country that asks, start spending money wisely, to influence educational systems, food distribution systems, basic infrastructure, medical facilities, and the like.

We do sell Israel armaments. I wonder what Israel would do without those armaments? How quickly they would have been subsumed by invading, antagonistic neighbors? I wonder how many more Israelis would have been killed by rocket attacks. I wonder how many fewer Arab civilians would have been killed. Again, no one wins.

I wonder at the irony of the Israel/Palesine educational systems:

Where in Palestinian schools, hatred against Jews and Israelis is encouraged, yet "service" against the Israelis and "The Jews" is optional, whereas in public Israeli schools hatred towards non-Jews and non-Israelis is discouraged at every possible opportunity, and yet military service is mandatory. No small irony, there.

I think I already mentioned that Israel lost whatever upperhand in whatever the current conflict is when they begin attacking infrastructure. I would guess that this is why the West Bank Palestinians have not yet joined the fray; compared to Gaza, they're doing all right, and don't want to jeopardize the food, roads, airports, money, etc..

Terrorism and fundamentalism have their roots in poverty, in powerlessness, in colonialism. The roots are formed when people feel they have no choice, no options.

I would just ask you, not in some pro-Israeli stance but in the sense of fairness, to remember that the Israelis feel the same way as the Palestinians do about this.

And the more I think about it, the more I believe that the US has little to do with it. It will take the whole world, speaking as one, condemning Syria and Iran and Israel and all those who would jeopardize peace.

[AnOhioan]

37. Let me say first off...

It is impossible to talk about the current situation as though it occurred in a void. All that went before plays into what happens today, therefore my comment about no one having a moral superiority.

I was not only referring to our arms sales to Israel but all of them, to India, to Pakistan, to Saddam's Iraq, etc.

Israel beat off the Arab nations numerous times early in her history. She has never needed our support, she is the only mideast nation to possess nuclear arms, she is not in any danger of annihilation, nor has been for many years.

I do not know what is taught in Palestinian schools but I would doubt that they are as bad as the teachings that occur in madrassas in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

I accept that the Israeli nation can (and most likely) does feel a sense of "no options", given history.

I can see why fundamentalism is as rampant in Israel as it is in other nations of the region.

Your last sentence I agree with, it will take the entire world, speaking with one voice.

Until that happens someone has to take the lead, and that someone should be the United States.

[madeline_con]

44. Actually, there is a lot of evidence that poverty does not cause

terrorism. Bin Laden is a billionaire. Most terrorists are better educated and better off financially than one would expect if poverty were breeding terrorism.

[afrosia]

45. Bin Laden is just a cowardly prick though...

he doesn't carry anything out himself. Most of the people who actually carry out acts of terrorism are poor. The problem (IMHO) is that people who have nothing can often be easily misled and manipulated by people who seem rich and powerful. Hence the reason that Bush managed to manipulate so many of America's poor into voting him in. The problem, as usual is the large gap between rich and poor, and the envy it creates.

Having said that I don't know how a skinny, jaundice man lying in a bed can seem powerful!

[madeline_con]

51. A prick with access to a lot of cash, nonetheless. n/t

[barb162]

31. People have to be pragmatic and bewilling to deal, compromise

Until that happens, forget about peace. Religious zealots don't operate on compromise

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

46. They also eat children.

The never fail best way to bring stability, understanding, and peace to a troubled nation is to bomb the living shit out of their infrastructure, destabilize in its infancy their attempt at a reformist government, and leave an entire generation with a firm reminder of what its like to have an F-16 render to bloody pieces the family next door.

Their will be winners and losers: the winners will be the lunatic fringe on both sides, and the losers will be everybody else caught in the middle.

[barb162]

38. Khamenei is a blowhard who is an infectious tumour

for the entire Islamic world. What a disgusting, anti-semitic jerk

[JackNewtown]

39. The real infectious tumor in the Islamic world:

Islamic fundamentalism.

[barb162]

40. gotta agree with you there, friend

[barb162]

41. and welcome to DU

[leesa]

50. Both Jewish and Muslim extremists are equally bad and unfortunately

Israel's government has been controlled by Jewish extremists for a long time now. They are as bad as Bush and his Neocon thugs and as bad as Khamenenei and his thugs.

And for all you Muslim haters on this board, how many has Khamenei killed vs we in the US?? We are faaaar more deadly, so face reality.