Iran's Ahmadinejad on the Jewish Holocaust

[Alafia87]

Iran's Ahmadinejad on Holocaust

Notice he never denies the holocaust, he just questions it.

Ahmadinejad Meeting With Anti-Zionist Jews

Meeting with Anti-Zionist Jews in New York

[gman]

My enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend. Most of these world leaders need to be thrown in the bottomless pit and Ahmadinejad is no exception.
Having said that... if Israel was your neighbour wouldn't you want a couple of nukes too? It's not like Israel is getting condemned for having them...
That particular group of anti-Zionist jews are not really the ones I respect. I respect people like Chomsky, Finkelstein and the holocaust survivor on the ship that recently tried to break the Gaza blockade - people who are opposed to Israel/Zionism for moral reasons. Some of that particular group might also be opposed to Zionism for moral reasons but mostly it's to do with their interpretation of religious scripture. And if I was a woman it's be a tough choice between them and the Taliban as far as who would give me more freedom.
As for the holocaust - it definitely happened and the Nazis definitely killed millions of Jews - as well as Gypsies, trade unionists, disabled people etc. etc.

[Alafia87]

 Hey brother gman, I don't consider Israel an enemy (or a friend for that matter), but I do like Ahmadinejad a lot.  I wonder what is your criticism of him.  I like him because he stands up for his country in face of plot after plot against him by the West. . .About the nuclear weapons, I don't believe for an instant that he wants nuclear weapons; he is a very religious person and believes that nuclear weapons are against Islam.  In his talks he says time after time that the nuclear weapons never saved the Soviet empire from dissolving and it cannot save the Zionist regime either.  I think he believes as he says, that this is the era for cultural exchanges not the era of the bomb.  I sincerely think his country just wants peaceful nuclear energy for medical and energy purposes; not that I think nuclear energy is "clean" as I have heard him say--it's a very destructive energy and I think it should be outlawed, but I don't think he's looking for a bomb, Israeli neighbor or no Israeli neighbor.

I hear you on the types of anti-zionist Jews you respect.  It's a good point.  I do respect these ones too because they call the Israeli regime an illegal one which does suggest some moral opposition to the occupation.

As for the holocaust, Ahmadinejad has called it a myth, and these Anti-Zionist Jews, some of whom have lost family members in the holocaust have agreed.  Now what I want to know is what would make someone agree that it was a myth, when they also acknowledge that their family was killed in the holocaust.  The problem as I see it is that there is not a free ability to research the facts of the holocaust without being referred to as a holocaust denier.  We know that the Jewish holocaust happened but it is the numbers and the methods of killing that are in question.  Added to the pot are those who are genuinely racist against Jews and are taking part in revisionism.  I don't remember the source right now, but I've seen pictures of the plaque at Auschwitz over the years that lists the number of dead at that particular camp and the number keeps getting lower and lower and lower.  Some researchers have suggested that the gas chambers were never used as a method of killing, just bullets I think.  And some other researchers have put the number of Jews killed to around 300,000-400,000, which is still an enormous number of people.  Plus, it has been said that 60 million people died during WW2, 2 million military.  Even if it was 6 million, what about the other 52 million people, was that not a genocide as well?  I personally have more questions than answers about the Jewish Holocaust.

[gman]

Hail up comrade (don't know if u r a brudda or a sista)... I don't have a lot of time on the computer at the moment so will be brief and just address one of your questions and come back another time for the rest.
I consider Ahmandinejad to be an oppressor of his people just like pretty much every other world leader (some more than others of course). Yes, he has been firm in standing up to the west, and yes, the west has been shafting Iran from ever since, and yes, the west are complete hypocrites talking about human rights in Iran... like they really give a damn about human rights (check the other article I posted today). That doesn't mean I like him though. He orders his citizens to be mowed down for expressing dissent and presides over a theocratic dictatorship. Religion or lack thereof should be a purely personal matter and not imposed on people by the state (and how much you wanna bet that some of those top theocrats in Iran aren't living as "pure, Islamic" lives as they make out... seems to be that decent religious leaders are the exception to the rule and I don't trust the average priest, rabbi, imam or pandit as far as I could throw them (which wouldn't be far cos a lot of em are living fat off their dirt-poor congregations who they've deceived into thinking that they're somehow "closer to god" than they are).
From my (limited) understanding the Iranian revolution of 1979 was a hugely popular revolt against a corrupt dictator that then got co-opted and taken over by another bunch of corrupt dictators. Maybe a little less blatantly corrupt than the shah and more resistant to the west, but that doesn't make them good guys. It's still run by an elite who look after themselves and is also extremely sexist (a point the Iranian theocrats have in common with that particular bunch of anti-zionist jews - which I'll get into next time I post. Til them, peace and stay up.

[Alafia87]

Yes bro. gman, I am a brown-skin black brother.

About Ahmadinejad, it is really the Supreme Leader that is in control of things, not the president.  I can't, therefore hold Ahmadinejad accountable for the policies of the Leader.  As for ordering people to be mowed down for expressing dissent, can I assume you're referring to the June 12th elections of 2009?  If so, I have to concede that I wasn't happy with the way the opposition was treated, but I also wasn't happy with the way the government was treated.  The Bush administration spent $400 million in Iran to foment a popular revolution.  Why were some of these Iranian women (green movement) dressed in high end American sunglasses?  Why were so many of the revolutionary protest signs in English?  Who started the shootings?  It was the Supreme Leader that said he would crack down on the people, not Ahmadinejad.

Ahmadinejad has brought relief to the poor people of his country with his economic policies.  That is why they voted for him 2:1 over any of the other candidates.  The whole belief that he did not win was an orchestrated psychological war that was being waged by the west against Iran.  To call Iran a dictatorship is misguided, they are heavily democratic and have one of the highest rates of voter participation in the world.

One thing I don't like about Ahmadinejad is his support of the mistreatment of people of the Bahai faith, though.  As Muslims, they believe that Muhammad was the last divine prophet and they ruthlessly persecute the Bahai for having a prophet that came after Muhammad.  That's why I'm more afraid of people who think that they're right then people who think they're wrong.  But despite this, I don't really have a problem with a theocracy.  The Caribs and Arawaks had a theocracy, The Olmecs, Incas, and Mayans had a theocracy, the Ancient Egyptians and every African nation known to man had a theocracy, so I don't see a problem with the theocratic form of government, I would just have to be living at the place with a spiritual system (Indigenous) that I can tolerate.

I look forward to your response to this and my earlier email when you have time.

Peace

[gman]

Hail up bro... just to let u know I've seen your response and am not ignoring u - lots on the plate, will respond next week.
Did u send an email to my email address? I missed it if so... I get tons of stuff in my email so it's easy to miss things - I'll have a glance through when I get the time.

[gman]

Hail up... re people getting mowed down: yes I was talking about the treatment of the protesters (many of whom would have been sincere advocates of change who would certainly not all be aware of any funding that may have been given to the "green" movement by amerikkka... and not all of whom were middle or upper class [and the sunglasses could've been cheap knock-offs ... but I was also referring to the treatment of people in general where people are getting executed for things like adultery (which should be no one's business other than the parties concerned, and which I really doubt is a punishment applied equally to males as females), or petty crimes motivated by their economic situation. Re democracy: I am no expert on Iran and would be perfectly willing to concede that it might be just as democratic as, or more democratic than, western states; but I don't see "democracy" as a be all and end all anyway. It is just as possible for an elite to manipulate and oppress the masses using "democracy" as using out and out tyranny, and even if democracy is absolutely genuine and un-manipulated I don't think 51% of the population have the right to order the other 49% what to do, any more than vice versa. The ideal way of making decisions would be to discuss things til people reach a consensus, obviously that will not always be possible so direct democracy starting at the local level is the next best way, but the minority should always have the right to dissent as long as they are not actively trying to sabotage the plans of the majority, which is not how western-style parliamentary democracy works and I doubt it's how Iranian democracy works either. Re theocracies: I don't look to any of those societies you mentioned as the pinnacles of human achievement; they may have been substantially better than our present day societies in some regards (difficult to tell without a time machine) but they were all divided between elites and the masses still, they still oppressed and invaded other people and so on. I do not agree that all societies have always had that kind of theocracy or elite control. For the vast majority of human existence we existed as small groups of hunter-gatherers and/or cultivators which tended to have little hierarchy between their members. Men and women might have had different roles, elders might have been listened to more than youngsters, you might have had the shaman/priest, the war leader and different roles like that but there generally wasn't that big a difference in power between individuals. Some of the Amerindian communities in Guyana still live more or less like that. They might have a chief, but he's also "uncle joe" who you grew up with and who doesn't have the power to force you to do anything the way a government with an army, police etc. does. As far as what Niyabinghi Rastas call "theocracy", I always got the impression that that was more like what MOVE in Philly call "the government of self"... i.e. "God" is in all of us so if you are in touch with that divine element in yourself and living your life accordingly, then that is "theocracy". I don't think Rastas tend to use that word with the same meaning others might. This is an interesting archived thread on here touching on these sorts of things... I would be in general agreement with the views expressed by Ras Jahaziel and Ras Marcus on this thread:
http://www.rastafarispeaks.com/cgi-bin/forum/archive1/config.pl?noframes;read=53737
I've got to go but will be back sometime to talk more about that group of anti-zionist jews and the holocaust. Til then, respect iyah and stay up.

[Alafia87]

Peace Bro.,

    I think I hear what you're saying about those societies not being your idea of the pinnacle of human achievement.  I would have to ask, is there any society that you would say qualifies as this?

    When I say theocracy, what I mean is a system of government in which the Gods or dieties are seen as the supreme civil authority and the Gods' laws are the basis of the foundation of the taboos the society observes.  My brother is a Nyabinghi Rasta, but I didn't know of their definition of theocracy until reading this tonight.  However, according to my definition of theocracy, it doesn't then mean that the authorities have the right to tell you what to do.  In Itoure (the Nile Valley) our ancestors followed the 77 commandments.  But one was not sanctioned when one was unable to follow one or another of the commandments.  This was seen as punishing someone for their handicap; but if your inability to follow one of the commandments infringed on the life of someone else (rape, murder) you or your family did have to provide reparations to the family of the victim.

As for the green movement, I'm sure there were sincere believers in the rhetoric of the green party, but just like in Ukraine in 2004 (orange), and the Pakistan Lawyers Movement in 2007 (black), these were CIA led colour revolutions where people were specifically paid to revolt.  I tend to think that it is the majority of people that were paid and that people would generally know about the paycheck in exchange for the protest.  People in Ukraine were outside in the winter (November) in freezing cold weather "protesting."  They tried to do the same thing in Zimbabwe around 2006 if I remember correctly. 

One more thing for the record about the Naturei Karta Rabbis.  I contacted them and asked them why would they call the holocaust a myth and the Rabbi that responded to me said it was not a myth and it was almost 6 million Jews.  So the second video I posted misquoted them.  Personally I'm still researching the facts of the holocaust, but thought I should post that they disagree with Ahmadinejad's statement.

[gman]

Hey big man... just to say, I will get forward to de I to respond to your comments... just busy at the moment.
respect

[Alafia87]

No problem man. Take your time.  Being on this website has given me a lot of
patience.  Unless I'm posting something, I generally don't check more than once a week.

Best

[gman]

Haile I
No, there is no society that I would say is perfect or the pinnacle of human achievement - or if there is one, it exists in the future, and I'm not able to see the universe four-dimensionally (see Ras Tyehimba's post about the 10 dimensions in the documentary section)... at least not consistently, although both my own experience and intuition and recent peer-reviewed scientific research suggests that people can sometimes do that... anyway, that's off-topic. What I think there have been, and are, are societies that are far less stratified than the type of very hierarchical, top-down, elite-controlled systems that dominate the world today. As I said before - for the vast majority of our existence on earth, humans did not live in these type of systems, or even the type of systems like Khemet, the Olmecs,etc. that pre-date them but that also seem to have had hereditary elites and different classes in society. For most of our existence we existed in small-scale hunter-gatherer-with-perhaps-some-cultivation type societies that - if the few such societies that still survive today are any indication - tended to be much more egalitarian.
I don't see any substantial difference between societies like the U.S.A. and Iran (for example). They are both controlled by elites who tend to look down on the masses as incapable of self-direction. They are based on the idea that some people are inherently more capable of governing society than others. I don't believe this. And, while I don't know if the enforcement of the 77 (?I'd thought it was 42) commandments of Khemet was as you say - that is certainly not the case in a society like Iran, where people certainly are punished, and in a very draconian manner, for violating religious edicts (far short of rape or murder) - although I'm sure they're not punished equally, because as in every society that has an elite, the elite can always get away with things that "ordinary" people get punished for. Look at Saudi Arabia where you can get stoned to death for homosexuality, adultery etc., punished severely for drinking a beer, etc., but where nuff of the princes and sheikhs are homo/bi-sexuals, adulterers, and feel free to hold wild parties with alcohol flowing freely.
Because the U.S.A. is against Ahmadinejad and is more powerful than Iran and has historically abused and battered Iran up to this day should mean that we don't buy into or provide support for all the propaganda against Iran that is being used to whip up support for attacking them - but at the same time, it does not mean we should automatically support Ahmadinejad or the rest of the regime. I certainly would have opposed Adolf Hitler in WW2 and might have fought against his attempt to invade Britain, but that doesn't mean I would have supported Winston Churchill. I think they were fundamentally similar people with fundamentally similar ideologies and actions (just an analogy - perhaps not a very good analogy, as the British Empire and the Third Reich were much closer to being an even match than the U.S. versus Iran, which is more like a giant going after a midget - but hope you get the point).
Re Niyabinghi definition of theocracy - I am not Niyabinghi in the sense of belonging to the Haile Selassie I Theocracy Government which has specific principles, rituals etc., so I can't speak for them - it's just the general impression I had formed that they do not mean a dictatorial kind of theocracy. The attitude of the Rasta elders (Niyabinghi and otherwise) who I have encountered is far from dictatorial and one of the things that attracted me to Rasta is the relative lack of hierarchy and the space given to formulate one's own ideas and interpretations within the general framework of Rasta.
As far as groups, societies or organisations that are models of the way to move forward now - there is no one that I think has THE answer or THE way to go, but generally the more a group is egalitarian, gives all its members a say, is not dominated by one or a few personalities/egos, and thinks that individual rights and community rights do not have to be in conflict but can be complementary, the more I support them. So I like Rastafari rather than Christianity or Islam or Judaism (as those religions are interpreted by the majority of their followers), for example. I like Dr. Walter Rodney rather than Forbes Burnham (see my recent post in the documentary section). I like the Zapatistas rather than the Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path). I like the Spanish anarchists (anarcho-communists) rather than the Lenin, Stalin etc. version of authoritarian communism. I like people like the Revolutionary Autonomous Communities (again, see documentary section) rather than Bob Avakian's Revolutionary Communist Party (which is a personality cult around Bob Avakian in my opinion)... and so on.
As far as the Iranian and Pakistani movements you mention, I don't know to what extent they were externally funded and directed or to what extent, if at all, people were paid, so I won't comment on that. But certainly in the case of Pakistan you have a society that is highly corrupt and controlled by an elite of feudal landlords with a security force reknowned for being torture sub-contractors for the U.S.A. amongst others, so I don't know how much interest the U.S.A. and co. would have in undermining that, since it works for their interests (and that includes their "playing both sides of the fence" and sponsoring terrorism, etc. - the U.S. needs, or at least likes, terrorism, as it gives them the excuse to engage in their own even more deadly terrorism (not that they won't do that without an excuse - but it's good for them P.R.-wise).
Well, it's late at night and I was trying to cover a lot of ground there - don't know how coherent that was so I'll leave it at that for now. I'll reason more about Palestine (I don't even like to say "Israel" cos I don't think that country should exist) and the rabbis next time I post on this thread - I should try to find out a bit more about that particular group of jews you mention as I don't want to rely on too much hearsay or confuse them with other groups who may have a similar external appearance. Re the Jewish holocaust though - I'm pretty damn sure it happened and it was millions of people who were exterminated - whether six million might be an exagerration I don't know, Norman Finkelstein estimates more like five million, but that's still a hell of a lot of people. (Though lets not forget the other four million gypsies, disabled people, trade unionists, african-germans, communists, gays etc. etc. who the nazis also exterminated, or the thirteen million Congolese that Leopold of Belgium exterminated in a shorter period of time with less technology available, or the three million Indians/Bengalis deliberately starved to death by Winston Churchill in the 1940s, etc. - the Jewish people of Europe undoubtedly suffered terribly but they ain't the only ones and suffering is no excuse to impose suffering on someone else).
Bless Up Idren... happy new year in advance, I know it's babylon's calendar but whatever... Walk good iyah

[Alafia87]

Greetings brother,

    Happy New Year.  Sorry I'm just getting back to this two months later.  I've been occupied with other things and more recently have had some internet connectivity problems. . .

    Regarding the 4th dimension (I watched the videos), at a certain level of the Kemetic priesthood, one is trained to access visions.  This includes seeing the self and others in the context of the future.  This is certainly not new.

    About the length of time we humans have been around in more hunter-gatherer societies, I'm not sure I accept the common wisdom that domestication of plants and agriculture started only 10,000 years ago.  I don't remember exactly where I heard this except being that it was from a trusted source, but I was told that garlic in its current form is over 40,000 years old.  What I do know is that there are medical papyri that are over 140,000 years old.  Humans in our current form have been around for approximately 150,000 years.  At least one of the pyramids in Kemet (Egypt) is approximately 73,300 years old.  I don't think that hunter/gatherers built pyramids. Here is the link for that pyramid story:  http://www.nondomesticatedthinker.com/2010/04/the-sidereal-calendar-by-naba-la-moussa-morodenibig/     

    The 42 commandments you know of came about because of a tradition in the Nile Valley that before one died, one would write down which commandments one had followed so as to be reminded of what to work on during the next incarnation.  The 42 were found in this ancestor's grave and was his personal admonition to himself, that's the reason they read "I have not."  It's not easy to follow all 77 perfectly on a daily basis as well as throughout the length of a life, so that's why there were only 42 of them; these were the commandments that this ancestor of ours was able to follow during his life.

    Regarding a pinnacle of humanity, I do think that the Kemetic civilization was and is the pinnacle of all human civilization.  I don't think it was perfect, though.  The pharaohs of the 18th dynasty for example, Amenhotep 1-3, Akhenaton, and Tutankhamun were very materialistic and started to see their greatness as coming from how many lands they conquered and how much they possessed of things that were considered valuable.  But they had no police and, contrary to the biblical "history", no slavery (though you could be made a servant as punishment for murder you or someone in your family had committed).  Also, in Kemet, the society ruled itself, with all of the sacrifices of the people being valued equally.  A blacksmith was given the same consideration as a farmer or a healer. Regarding hereditary elites in governorship, I don't have a problem with that.  The pharaoh was elected by a group of priests according to his spiritual and traditional values as well as his wisdom.  The only thing is that in modern societies and Europe of old, the kings and other rulers had and have no desire for anything other than enriching themselves and staying in power.

     I'm also starting to think that saying I like Ahmadinejad is a little strong.  Because I don't really know him.  But I will say that I respect some things that he has said and though I disagree strongly with some of his stances e.g. death penalty, much of the power in his society is with the Supreme Leader, not the President.  Here are some articles that will describe the real situation with the June 12th 2009 election.  It's kind of like the article you posted about the revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23745.html (Ahmadinejad won, get over it)
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/18/cia-has-distributed-400-million-dollars-inside-iran-to-evoke-a-revolution/
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/proof-israeli-effort-to-destabilize-iran-via-twitter/
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/iran-some-dots-you-may-want-to-connect/

      I'm not too familiar with the shining path, but your point is well taken that an "enemy's enemy" is not necessarily a friend.  I only recently found out that Forbes Burnham was seen by some as an anti-imperialist!  How can he be an anti-imperialist and a close collaborator with them at the same time??  Not possible.

     For the Jewish Holocaust reading, I asked the Naturei Karta Rabbis  what they recommend and they said "The Destruction of the European Jews" by Raul Hilberg, and "Why Did the Heavens Not Darken" by Arno Mayer, so I've got a bit of reading to do.  They even recommended a book about the Zionist role in the holocaust called "Holocaust Victims Accuse" by Moshe Shonfeld.  One book I read called "Perfidy" by Ben Hecht was very illuminating about the Zionist role in the holocaust and the creation of the State of Israel.  They use the 6 million figure.  Norman Filkenstein is on my radar and I will get to him at some point. . .Like I say, I don't hate Jews and I'm not a holocaust denier, I just don't know what the number killed was.  According to Dr. Ahmadinejad, 60 million people died during WW2, and only 2 million were military personnel.  The Naturei Karta Rabbis say that approx. 6 million were slaughtered and they come to that number because sometimes there would only be one or two left from an entire village.  What they say is reasonable, I'm just reserving judgement until I can say I know.

All the best,

[gman]

Yes bredren... lots to digest there and I'm busy, will get forward to de I presently... Bless

[Alafia87]

Sure thing.  One other thing I that by definition a pinnacle is just the highest point, not the highest possible point, so I would be interested in who you think has reached that highest point.

[leeyn]

I don't believe for an instant that he wants nuclear weapons; he is a very religious person and believes that nuclear weapons are against Islam. 。。