Blogs

Iran keeps saying it’s nuking up – despite what its Western apologists say

14 August 2012

5:39 PM

14 August 2012

5:39 PM

The same problem keeps occurring for the megaphones of Iranian propaganda in the West: they keep being let down by their own side.  Every time another op-ed appears in the Guardian or Nation arguing that Iran isn’t seeking a nuclear device (and even if was it would never use it, and even though it doesn’t want a nuke and wouldn’t use it if it did, it does still at least have the ‘right’ to one) another Iranian official or one of their proxies lets slip the truth.

The latest person to let the side down is the Hezbollah MP Walid Sakariya.  The MP for the Iranian Revolutionary government’s party in Lebanon told the Hezbollah TV station al-Manar last week that the purpose of Iran’s nuclear project is to annihilate Israel.  As he says, “The entire equation in the Middle East will change.”  Indeed.

[Alt-Text]


The MP, who is also a retired general, explained that Iran’s nukes would not only be used for Iran’s interests, but for Syria’s too, as though the two (three if you include Hezbollah) are not currently the same thing.  He goes on:

‘This nuclear weapon is intended to create a balance of terror with Israel, to finish off the Zionist enterprise, and to end all Israeli aggression against the Arab nation.’

I was going to say that if people like Sakariya ever get their dream those shills in the West will feel pretty silly.  But of course they won’t.  They will feel very happy, having got what they wanted all along.

More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.




Show comments
  • John

    Daniel Maris: There already is a 2 state solution. Most of Palestine belongs to the Muslims and is called “Jordan”. Israel having suffered its third unprovoked attack by the Muslims – in the 6 Day War, in 1967 – did exactly what the Muslims did in precisely the same circumstances, after the Greeks launched a rather less unprovoked attack on Turkey in 1919 (as over 1/3 of a million of them had been massacred by the Muslim Turks along with 1.500,000 Armenian Christians and 3/4 of a million Assyrian Christains), It was nevertheless an unannounced, (and ill-advised) attack. The Turks, like the Israelis, thrashed their opponents and retained the land they had occupied and retain it to this day, in the shape of most of Thrace and the odd Aegean island or two. In the same way, Israel has held onto the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, but handed back the Sinai territory to Egypt and the Gaza Strip to its inhabitants. They have every right to expel all the Muslims from the West Bamk and hold onto that too so far as I can see. The Turks expelled all the Greeks from Anatolia and their portion of Thrace and the Muslims have expelled all the Jews from all their countries since the end of WW2. Why the Israelis didn’t immediately lay claim to the West Bank after the 6 Day War has always puzzled me – the Turkish precedent was staring them on the face and they didn’t hesitate to claim the Golan Heights etc. Apparently it’s fine if the Muslims annexe conquered territory after an unprovoked attack but outrageous if the Israelis do exactly the same thing. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

  • Nin

    I wonder whether the Iran MP really did “let slip” or whether this was more of a pre-planned Boris-esque hiccup that intended to threaten the Israeli government.

  • Joaqim

    It’s no secret that Iran wants nukes, but the problem is that there uranium is too poor. Even if they did get nukes, they would be obliterated by the US.

  • MaxSceptic

    The notion of Iranian Mullahs with nukes is horrendous.
    All and any means must be used to stop this possibility.

  • Sarah

    BBC/Guardian are Islamists’ organs. Yes they will feel very happy, having got what they always wanted – a world without Jews.

  • http://twitter.com/raymonddelauney raymond delauney

    No mention of Amimut, Dimona or the genuine threats made by a bellicose Netanyahu. There’s no casus belli … so we’ll talk one up.

    Along with his colleague Michael Weiss, Mr Murray is doing a fine job of promoting any attack on Iran. As both are employees of a charity, the Henry Jackson Society, it begs the question why the Charity Commission continues to allow them to operate their crude and skewed propaganda campaign?

    • AY

      this is just set of words loosely connected by anti-Semitic emotion.

      removal of iranian fascist regime is absolute necessity for West.
      alternative is to become hostages of nuclear mullas.

      Mr Murray promoting not “attack on iran” but self-defense of the West.

      and if the next after syria and iran, the poisonous wahhabi oil-and-terror hub in the Gulf collapses – the whole world will breathe even easier.
      sooner or later, retrograde islamic projects will crash everywhere.

      • Wot?

        “…anti-Semitic emotion” “removal of iranian fascist regime is absolute necessity” You hypocrite!

        • AY

          why hypocrite, why not motorbike?

  • AY

    it is always funny to see confusion of islamic bloggers when issue
    touches sunni-shia divide.

    on the one hand, inertia forces them to resist criticism of islamic expansionism anyway.
    on the other hand, their gut feeling is that spread of “wrong version” of islam means lethal threat to their tribe.

    among representatives here, it looks like, there are no shia’s, so they are quite flacid in defending their mortal enemy and focus on the imaginary “evils” of israel.
    well, whatever is in Israel, that won’t save sunnis from evils of iranian nuclear “progress” :).

  • coventrian

    I see Douglas Murray quotes Memri – a Mossad front notorious for ‘creative’ translations.

    • T. Botham

      What feeble nonsense to counter a message you dislike. (Why you feel the need to question Memri’s translations to defend the Arab genocides is interesting in itself.) Arab sympathizers are embarrassed by what is said in Arabic to Arabs. Thanks to Memri, the world does not have to rely on the “creative” use of English by Arab PR spokespersons and intermediaries for the benefit of compassioneering Western audiences. Those who have accused Memri of mis-translation have themselves been caught being creative. The amusing aspect of this is that despite the efforts of anti-Zionists to translate extremist Arab statements “correctly” – i.e. not to reveal hate, or genocidal intent – the Arabs always repeat themselves, clearly and unequivocally. Please put up the translation of Sakaria which you prefer. Let’s see how he really meant “a democratic solution for peace and justice.”

      • victor67

        Memri is run by ex mossad. It is funded by right wing neo-con likudniks in the the States and translates only the most extreme texts from arabic and Farsi.

        • http://twitter.com/raymonddelauney raymond delauney

          Indeed MEMRI is a motley Israeli intelligence operation that somehow retains charitable status in the US. Its full title is the Middle East Media Research Institute. Search their site and you will find nothing that reflects negatively on Israel … which happens to be in the Middle East. Try finding a mention of racist attacks on African asylum seekers in Israel or the description of them as a “cancer” .by members of the Knesset…

          • T. Botham

            Memri frequently posts translations of brave Arabs and Muslims who are pro-Western and pacifist and dissent from the anti-Zionist line. This reflects positively on Israel’s enemies. Have you searched the ant–Zionist sites for positive statements about Israel? Or negative statements about Arabia or Islam? Memri frequently translates from Hebrew from all sides of politics. For righteous folks like you, doesn’t everything coming out of Israeli mouths concerning israel reflect negatively on it? Pro-israel and anti-Arab statements are hasbara, pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel statements are confessions of Zionists crimes.

          • Daniel Maris

            …we don’t need that revealed – I have read those stories in my newspaper and on BBC. MEMRI shows what our media doesn’t like to tell us about the Middle East – that it is a breeding swamp of anti-semitism.
            However, MEMRI does also show positive stories – revealing there are people in the Arab world who want genuine peace with Israel and who see how anti-Israelism is used by Arab/Iranian governments as an excuse for failure.

        • T. Botham

          Ex -mossad has nothing to do with the accuracy of the translations and the choice to bring you statements you would otherwise not hear. These “extreme” statements are common, non-controversial and widely broadcast in the Arab/Muslim world. Many are taken from TV tapes. See the recent candid-camera style Egyptian TV show where the producers prank guests by pretending to be a Jewish show. A female interviewer was punched by an outraged guest – a famous actor. It is not a lie because you do not like what you see. Why not re-examine your sympathies? And where do you get your information from?

          • victor67

            Roberk Fisk

            • Daniel Maris

              Now you’ve got me laughing. Robert Fisk who was nearly killed by a bunch of followers of the Religion of Peace – from which he concluded it was the fault of the Americans! :)

              • victor67

                Well he kind of know’s the middle east and has seen the brutality of all the protaginists. In his book Pity the Nation he describes how Ariel Sharon watched with binoculars the massacres in Sabra and Shatilla. An atrocity he engineered and was found indirectly responsible for.
                There are no countries in the ME that can claim any moral high ground.

        • Daniel Maris

          So what – and, no, they are not all the most extreme texts. They include things like the pro-suicide bombing “children’s bunny” on Palestine TV. You are now revealing yourself as a useful idiot of the anti-semites in the Middle East.

  • David Lindsay

    Not our problem.

    • Daniel Maris

      It will be as soon as Israel is out of the way. You think they are going to stop at Jersualem? Next stop: the Arabian oilfields. Not sure what the next target would be after that. Probably the first step would be to create a huge naval force in the Med for the Caliphate. Rome is a bit of obsession for them. And recovering Al Andalus. Of course somewhere along the line might be an all out Sunni-Shia civil war.

      • David Lindsay

        Barking mad.

        In any case, if we made proper use of nuclear power and of our vast reserves of coal, then it would concern us not one jot who controlled the Gulf oilfields. That is presumably why they are so much more relaxed about Iran, as they were about Iraq, in France and in Germany.

        But even if we had neither coal, nor access to Commonwealth uranium, then the only reason why anyone would want that oil would be to sell it. So, if you need to, then buy it. Buying it from Saddam would have been no different morally from buying it from the al-Sabahs and the al-Sauds. Nor would this be.

        As for Jerusalem, a country with reserved representation in Parliament for Armenians and Assyrians is a much better guarantor of Christendom’s interest in that historically integral part of it (for at least as long as it was ever under either Jewish or Israelitish rule, and a great deal more recently before the end or even the start of the British Mandate) than a State which has all but destroyed the devotion to Saint George at his place of birth and burial, and which lately tried to block the recognition of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem as a World Heritage Site.

        Among other such better guarantors are Jordan, Syria (for now), Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority (which secured that recognition), and Egypt, including under the new government there. Iraq was another, but we destroyed that. As we are now actively participating in the destruction of the one in Syria. And as the likes of Murray want us to destroy the one in Iran, too.

        • T. Botham

          Your obsession, fueled by a very selective reading of history, with “Christendom” is absurd. The various Christian sects surviving the predations of Islam and Arab thuggery loathe each other, especially in Bethlehem. Christians numbers are shrinking in the Arab and Muslim world. They are increasing in number in Israel. I am at a loss as to what you think is “Christendom’s interest” – upkeep of sites? freedom of worship? – in the region, that can or will be “guaranteed” by any powers except Israel. As for Iran, it views Christianity as apostasy. Please stop flapping the red cross flag. Your parade of one is not eccentric, it’s a sad self-parody.

          • David Lindsay

            Oh, you really, really don’t like people knowing about Middle Eastern Christianity, do you? Just imagine what, say, American foreign policy might be like if they did. And we can’t be having that. Can we…?

            • T. Botham

              As an atheist, I find Christianity’s doctrinal history to be a never-ending source of eye-popping astonishment, gob-smacking horror and giggles. Its ideological influence on politics in the Middle East and globally – not so droll. The more people know about the Holy, the better the hope that sanity will prevail.

        • Daniel Maris

          It’s what they do with the wealth of the oilfields that matters. The Saudis have already been destabilising countries across the world by funding the most extreme interpretations of Islam (or most honest if you prefer). We’ve felt the effects, but it will be nothing to what would happen if the most active Jihadists got their hands on the money.

          • David Lindsay

            And among their pet projects is Jundullah, also a favourite of those who want to end the present dispensation in Iran. Another such favourite is the PMOI/MEK, which we have adopted after we orphaned it by removing Saddam Hussein.

            Iran as she is, is infinitely preferable to either of those. And would be greatly preferable in control of the oil fields, if the choice had to be made. But that choice shouldn’t have to be made. At least, not by us. We can, and we should, chose to have nothing to do with it.

  • victor67

    So why is the whole of the Israeli cabinet and security establishment opposing Bibi and Olmert messianic crusade against the Mullahs?
    Perhaps Douglas as you are such an advocate of war you should enlist in the IDF and take the the fight to the Islamist foe or are you like the rest of the chickenhawk hacks who trumpted the lies about Iraq,Saddam and WMD and let others do the dying.

    • Daniel Maris

      Wrong about what? Saddam invaded a fellow UN Member state, he had WMD (as Hans Blix confirmed) and he refused to implemement the legal UN accords that had followed Gulf War One. Did Winston Churchill have to enlist in the Polish Cavalry before he was entitled to condemn Nazi aggression and warn of its consequences? Do I have to go out on a Police patrol before I am allowed to condemn crime?

      • victor67

        Not another comparison with 1939, Nazi’s and Chamberlin. US/Israel hawks have been using these pretexts to start their preemtive “defensive” wars for decades.

        • AY

          from foxnews today:
          In his latest pronouncement, Iranian Supreme leader Ali Khamenei said
          Israel will disappear from “the scene of geography.” …
          he said Iran considers it its
          “religious duty to save this Islamic country (Palestine) from the
          clutches of the Zionist occupiers.”

          do you support these statements?

          it is also not secret, that among other “religious duties” defined so generously by The Supreme Towel-Head-Ape Leader, – are hanging homosexuals, punishing blasphemers and apostates, stoning women for being raped, enslaving non-muslims and spreading that cave-age order worldwide.

          do you really want one day nuclear blackmail in London – “we will oblterate you in 24 hours for your support of zionists, unless you all submit to islam”?
          or, is this your dream, too?

          • Wot?

            What Banana would believe anything that Fox “News” says?

          • victor67

            No but neither do I support another preemtive “defensive war ” justified on the grounds of lies, half truths and propoganda just to maintain US/Israeli military domination of the ME.
            The Mullahs in Iran , Hezbullah and Hamas message falls on fertile ground due to the failure of the peace process. While certainly not all of that can be blamed on Israel . The neo-con likudnik hawks and their vision of a greater Israel have played their part.
            Remember Hezbullah were created to resist the Israeli invasion and occupation in the 1980s and Hamas was promoted as a counter to Arafat, Fatah and the PLO during the first Intifada.
            When Hamas was elected in Gaza in 2006 this was down to the corruption of Fatah who had grown fat on the the peace myth of the Oslo gravy train. The US/Israeli under Elliot Abrahams then sponsored a bloody coup against Hamas which spectatularly backfired. Ultimately Israel/US reap what they sow.

            • Daniel Maris

              If you believe that Hezbollah. Iran and Hamas would not be there but for the failure of the peace process, I think you are sadly deluded. It’s true Israel stupidly encouraged Hamas as we stupidly encouraged the Taliban. So what? The US also supported the USSR during WW2 and the Vietnamese Communists at the end of WW2…Stalin supported the formation of Israel…we supported Ghaddafi….Ghaddafi supported the IRA….we supported Mugabe’s election as President of Zimbabwe…the USA supports Pakistan which in turn promotes the Afghanistani Taliban who support the Pakistan Taliban who are trying to overthrow the Pakistan government…
              I think you are simply pointing out that people may make stupid decisions.
              But do you condemn unreservedly Hamas’s constitution? That’s more to the point.

        • Daniel Maris

          We should have launched a pre-emptive defensive war in 1936 and toppled the Nazi regime. It would have saved 50 millions lives and untold human suffering.

  • T. Botham

    Yes. There will be no feeling pretty silly. No remorse or regret. That understanding should be the bed-rock of Israeli foreign policy. Retaining the goodwill of America under Obama – the shill-in-chief – should be a dropped. The shills, often describing themselves as “true friends” of Israel, will merely express sorrow that Israel’s intransigence brought destruction upon itself. If only Jews had not insisted on recognition as a Jewish state, so much bloodshed would have been avoided. After all, the Jews have thrived under Muslim rule. Remember Al-Andalus?

    • Daniel Maris

      Israel should give up its crazy settlement policy on the West Bank and make it clear it accepts a proper two state solution.

      • AY

        problem is, opponents don’t accept anything less than destruction of Israel.

        as to this mantra of “settlements” – why don’t you ask first turkey to remove their settlements from Cyprus, Russia from Kuril islands, India from Kashmere, Britain from Gibraltar and Ireland, and pakistan from Luton and Bradford.

        • http://twitter.com/raymonddelauney raymond delauney

          @AY Talking of removing you could ask the Friends of Israel to remove MPs from both Labour and Conservative cabinets as way forward for Britain to begin to be an honest and impartial broker in the Middle East?

          We could also look at the Blair/Brown legacy of a politicised Civil Service and FCO. For a start we should recall the avowedly Zionist British Ambassador to Tel Aviv, the Bangladeshi High Commissioner to Bangladesh .. the list goes on..

          • AY

            that is certainly bloody Friends of Israel – who established no-go zones in Britain, rape non-Jewish children, master one terror plot after another, turn churches to synagogues, spread unlabeled unaccounted kosher fleisch, set multi-million Talmudic centers in every university, and flood every corner by cryptic message – convert to Judaism or die.

            Even on man united T-shorts, it is written “Fly Tel-Aviv”, what an assault on national spirits.

        • victor67

          What about the arab peace iniative (Saudi plan 2002) This offered acceptance of Israel and normalised relations with all 23 arab states in return for Israel to accept the 67 borders and a compromise on the refugee’s.
          Israel rejected this as it has its own religious extremists in the settler movement it does not confront.

          • AY

            how about that peace plan – saudi arabia cancels its ban on Jews, allows building synagogoues and churches, and stops gender apartheid.

            then, maybe, Israel will recognize saudia arabia and consider these initiatives.

            for Israel, it is blessing not to have any relations with this mordor.

            • Daniel Maris

              I agree. Those demands should be made loud and clear. But the evil practices of the Saudis don’t legitimise Israel’s West Bank policy.

              • AY

                neither “evil practices” of bbc and guardian will succeed in convincing each and every simpleton in the West that any Jewish apartment in Judea/Samaria (or in London or Paris) is “illegal settlement” and “impediment to peace in the middle east”.

                more than million arabs live in Israel, nobody denies them citizenship and civil/religious rights.

                on the other hand, the chairman of PA said and repeatd many times that Jews in Judea/Samaria “will not be tolerated”.
                you know, for some types any Jew anywhere is illegal.

                so there is, sort of, asymmetry.
                why arab presence in Israel is legal and Jewish presence in Judea is not?

        • Daniel Maris

          It doesn’t matter. They can carry on controlling the land until there is real peace – just stop building settlements for those nutty American/Mancunian types.
          Each case has to be discussed on its merits and its history. Hardly anyone recognise the Turkish state in Cyprus. Japan’s claim re the Kurile islands is tenuous. India has a good position on Kashmir and Britain’s claim to Gibraltar is rock-solid (at least as much as Spain’s claim to Melilla and Ceuta on what Moroccans consider their soil.)
          Israel’s claim to the West Bank (which even they don’t claim entirely as far as I can tell) is dodgy in the extreme.

          • T. Botham

            Israel’s claim to the West Bank is far less dodgy than anyone else’s. Jews should be able to settle in Judea whatever power is in control.

            • roger

              Jews should be able to live where they can buy land, but not impose a religious based state on anyone, nor should there be islamic or christian states. Britain mucked it up when they didn’t enforce the Balfour declaration, a home for Jews in Palestine while upholding the rights of existing christian and muslim arabs. It was a ‘Jewish State’ declared in 1948 that was the greatest wrong, aided by Shoa guilt and British bankruptcy (moral and financial).

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here