Thread: The Road to Tehran

The Road to Tehran
Polite society helped pave the way for Iran's Holocaust conference.

BY BRET STEPHENS
Saturday, December 16, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

"Not acceptable," says Ban Ki Moon, new Secretary-General of the United Nations. "Repulsive," say the editors of Britain's Guardian newspaper. "An insult . . . to the memory of millions of Jews," says Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Global polite society is in an uproar over the Holocaust conference organized this week in Tehran under the auspices of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Moral denunciation is what reasonable people do--what they must do--when a regime that avows the future extermination of six million Jews in Israel denies the past extermination of six million Jews in Europe. But let's be frank: Global polite society has been blazing its own merry trail toward this occasion for decades.

The Australian Financial Review is not the Journal of Historical Review, the Holocaust-denying "scholarly" vehicle of some of the Tehran conferees. But in 2002 the AFR thought it fit to print the following by Joseph Wakim, at one point the country's multicultural affairs commissioner: "Sharon's war is not a war," he wrote. "Genocide would be a more accurate description." In Ireland Tom McGurk, a columnist in the very mainstream Sunday Business Post, noted that "the scenes at Jenin last week looked uncannily like the attack on the Warsaw Jewish ghetto in 1944." Jose Saramago, Portugal's Nobel Laureate in Literature, observed after a visit to Ramallah that the Israeli incursion into the city "is a crime that may be compared to Auschwitz."

Never mind that the total number of Jews "dealt with" in the Warsaw ghetto, according to Nazi commandant Jürgen Stroop, was 56,065, whereas the number of Palestinians killed in Jenin was no more than 60. Never mind that at the time Mr. Saramago visited Ramallah a total of about 1,500 Palestinians had been killed in the Intifada, whereas Jews were murdered at Auschwitz at a rate of about 2,000 a day. Let's concede that, for the sake of moral truth, strained comparisons may still serve useful rhetorical purposes. (Jews and Israelis also often make inapt Holocaust and Nazi comparisons.) Let's concede, too, that the comments cited above amount to criticisms of Israeli policy, nothing more.


Yet once a country's policies are deemed Nazi-like, it necessarily follows that its leaders are Nazi-like and--if it's a popularly elected government--so are at least a plurality of its people. "As the dogma of intolerant, belligerent, self-righteous, God-fearing irridentists . . . [Zionism] is well adapted to its locality," wrote Tony Judt, head of New York University's Remarque Institute, in the New York Review of Books. Ian Buruma of Bard College derided Israel's "right-wing government supported by poor Oriental Jews and hard-nosed Russians." And from British MP Gerald Kaufman, this: "If the United States is keen to invade countries that disrupt international standards of order, should not Israel, for example, be considered as a candidate?"


As it happens, Messrs. Judt, Buruma and Kaufman are all Jewish. So let's also concede that it is not anti-Semitic to oppose Zionism. After all, among the Tehran conferees were rabbis from the ultra-orthodox Neturei Karta movement, who, like Mr. Ahmadinejad, actively call for the elimination of the state of Israel.

Yet simply because opposition to Zionism ideologically or Israel politically isn't necessarily anti-Semitic, it doesn't therefore follow that being anti-Zionist or anti-Israel are morally acceptable positions. There are more than six million Israelis who presumably wish to live in a sovereign country called Israel. Are their wishes irrelevant? Are their national rights conditional on their behavior--or rather, perceptions of their behavior--and if so, should such conditionality apply to all countries? It also should be obvious that simply because opposition to Zionism does not automatically make one guilty of anti-Semitism, neither does it automatically acquit one of it.

Such nuances, however, seem to go unnoticed by some of Israel's more elevated critics. Michel Rocard said in 2004 that the creation of the Jewish state was a historic mistake, and that Israel was "an entity that continues to pose a threat to its neighbors until today." Mr. Rocard is the former Prime Minister of France, an "entity" that itself posed a threat to its neighbors for the better part of its history.

Alternatively, Professors Stephen Walt of Harvard and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, whose paper on "The Israel Lobby" is now being turned into a book, have complained that "anyone who criticises Israel's actions or argues that pro-Israel groups have significant influence over US Middle Eastern policy . . . stands a good chance of being labeled an anti-semite." Maybe. But earlier this week, former Klansman David Duke took the opportunity to tell CNN that he does not hate Jews but merely opposes Israel and Israel's influence in U.S. politics. He even cited Messrs. Walt and Mearsheimer in his defense. Would they exonerate him of being an anti-Semite?


In fact, anti-Zionism has become for many anti-Semites a cloak of political convenience. But anti-Zionism has also become an ideological vehicle for an anti-Semitism that increasingly feels no need for disguise. In January 2002, the New Statesman magazine had a cover story on "The Kosher Conspiracy." For art, they had a gold Star of David pointed like a blade at the Union Jack. This wasn't anti-Zionism. It was anti-Zionism matured into unflinching anti-Semitism. And it was featured on the cover of Britain's premiere magazine of "progressive" thought.


The scholar Gregory Stanton has observed that genocides happen in eight stages, beginning with classification, symbolization and dehumanization, and ending in extermination and denial. What has happened in Tehran--denial--may seem to have turned that order on its head. It hasn't. The road to Tehran is a well-traveled one, and among those who denounce it now are some who have already walked some part of it.

"Used with permission from OpinionJournal.com, a web site from
Dow Jones & Company, Inc."

I think the silent outrage by the world is testimony to the TRUTH of this editorial.

Not to mention that any day, the UN will REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY mean it and force Iran to cease it's nuclear ambitions.

But don't hold your breath for this one folks. Because the collective world has it's collective heads in their collective buttocks, chances of any serious reprisals or actions with regard to Iran are unlikely to happen. Then after Tehran has a nuke, the world will once more wring it's hands and wonder how TALK failed once more.

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Not to mention that any day, the UN will REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY mean it and force Iran to cease it's nuclear ambitions.

A. Iran has stated that it has no nuclear ambitions beyond developing nuclear energy in compliance with the NPT.
B. As a signatory to the NPT, Iran (and any other signatory) has every right to develop nuclear energy.
C. Iran has complied with all inspection requirements of it's nuclear energy program.
D. There is no evidence to support that Iran has nuclear ambitions other than generating energy despite the paranoia that eminates from Tel Aviv and Washington.

Originally Posted by EpluribusMaximus

A. Iran has stated that it has no nuclear ambitions beyond developing nuclear energy in compliance with the NPT.
B. As a signatory to the NPT, Iran (and any other signatory) has every right to develop nuclear energy.
C. Iran has complied with all inspection requirements of it's nuclear energy program.
D. There is no evidence to support that Iran has nuclear ambitions other than generating energy despite the paranoia that eminates from Tel Aviv and Washington.

Ah yes, the sweet smell of denial.

Denial that the centrifuges are used to develop weapons grade plutonium.

Denial that Tehran has stated clearly they support the destruction of Israel.

Denial that Tehran funds terrorism and the FACT that they are in violation of the very nuclear treaties they signed onto.

Yes, thanks for illustrating how deeply imbedded your collective heads are into your collective buttocks when it relates to Despotic regimes like Iran, Syria and North Korea.

Next you deny that the citizens of Iran have been denied their rights. Classic.

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Ah yes, the sweet smell of denial.

Denial that the centrifuges are used to develop weapons grade plutonium.

Denial that Tehran has stated clearly they support the destruction of Israel.

Denial that Tehran funds terrorism and the FACT that they are in violation of the very nuclear treaties they signed onto.

Yes, thanks for illustrating how deeply imbedded your collective heads are into your collective buttocks when it relates to Despotic regimes like Iran, Syria and North Korea.

Next you deny that the citizens of Iran have been denied their rights. Classic.

You were probobly propogating Iraqi WMD programs before the 2003 conquest as well.

Originally Posted by Horhey

You were probobly propogating Iraqi WMD programs before the 2003 conquest as well.

Got denial?

As well as all these DEMOCRATS:

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | <A href="http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Saddam+Hussein+has+been+engaged+in+ the+development+of+weapons+of+mass+destruction+tec hnology+which+is+a+threat+to+countries+in+the+regi on+and+he+has+made+a+moc" target=_blank>Source

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | <A href="http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Hussein+has+...+chosen+to+spend+his +money+on+building+weapons+of+mass+destruction+and +palaces+for+his+cronies."&hl=en&ie=UTF-8" target=_blank>Source

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | <A href="http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/4136328.htm" target=_blank>Source

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | <A href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/gore_text092302.html" target=_blank>Source

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | <A href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/gore_text092302.html" target=_blank>Source

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | <A href="http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/02/10/2002A07621.html" target=_blank>Source

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | <A href="http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Saddam+Hussein+has+been+engaged+in+ the+development+of+weapons+of+mass+destruction+tec hnology+which+is+a+threat+to+countries+in+the+regi on+and+he+has+made+a+moc" target=_blank>S<A href="http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Saddam+Hussein+has+been+engaged+in+ the+development+of+weapons+of+mass+destruction+tec hnology+which+is+a+threat+to+countries+in+the+regi on+and+he+has+made+a+moc" target=_blank>ource

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | <A href="http://www.senate.gov/~rockefeller/news/2002/flrstmt0102002.html" target=_blank>Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | <A href="http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html" target=_blank>Source

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | <A href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/DL12Ak02.html" target=_blank>Source

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Got denial?

As well as all these DEMOCRATS:

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | <A href="http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Saddam+Hussein+has+been+engaged+in+ the+development+of+weapons+of+mass+destruction+tec hnology+which+is+a+threat+to+countries+in+the+regi on+and+he+has+made+a+moc" target=_blank>Source

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | <A href="http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Hussein+has+...+chosen+to+spend+his +money+on+building+weapons+of+mass+destruction+and +palaces+for+his+cronies."&hl=en&ie=UTF-8" target=_blank>Source

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | <A href="http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/4136328.htm" target=_blank>Source

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | <A href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/gore_text092302.html" target=_blank>Source

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | <A href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/transcripts/gore_text092302.html" target=_blank>Source

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | <A href="http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/02/10/2002A07621.html" target=_blank>Source

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | <A href="http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Saddam+Hussein+has+been+engaged+in+ the+development+of+weapons+of+mass+destruction+tec hnology+which+is+a+threat+to+countries+in+the+regi on+and+he+has+made+a+moc" target=_blank>S<A href="http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:u62ZeSGUfj0J:washingtontimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm+"Saddam+Hussein+has+been+engaged+in+ the+development+of+weapons+of+mass+destruction+tec hnology+which+is+a+threat+to+countries+in+the+regi on+and+he+has+made+a+moc" target=_blank>ource

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | <A href="http://www.senate.gov/~rockefeller/news/2002/flrstmt0102002.html" target=_blank>Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | <A href="http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html" target=_blank>Source

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | <A href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/DL12Ak02.html" target=_blank>Source

The war party in Washington consists of both Democrats and Republicans. The conquest of Iraq began under the Clinton administration through coup attempts, bombing campaigns, sanctions, and propaganda.

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Ah yes, the sweet smell of denial.

Only to be eclipsed by the scent of paranoid delusions.

Denial that the centrifuges are used to develop weapons grade plutonium.

Are these anything like to mobile bio-weapon labs Saddam had?

Denial that Tehran has stated clearly they support the destruction of Israel.

Irrelevant to the discussion, that is unless you are a Zionist or a Zionist apologist.

Denial that Tehran funds terrorism and the FACT that they are in violation of the very nuclear treaties they signed onto.

Horseshit. If Iran is in violation of the NPT then the UN would have a report on it. When you find it, I'd be glad to review it.

Yes, thanks for illustrating how deeply imbedded your collective heads are into your collective buttocks when it relates to Despotic regimes like Iran, Syria and North Korea.

Actually when you make up things in attempt to prove a point it simply shows that you are a shill and have no actual interest in reality.

Next you deny that the citizens of Iran have been denied their rights. Classic.

I haven't denied anything other than your false allegations, just another drop in the turd pile which follows you around.

Truth Deflector! I like your signature.
I guess we have NOTHING to fear from this administration.

PS What's with the green? Doesn't make that garbage slide down any easier.

Iran has as much right to host a conference regarding the details of the holocaust, as the Flat Earth Society has to host a conference examining its loony platform.

Only those who want to believe such nonsense, would support the preposterous idea that the ducumented murder of six million people did not occur. However, no harm can come from objectively examining the detail.

It is a nonsense to suggest that talking about the matter is an insult to the memory of anyone. There has been extensive investigation into the 500,000 casualties at the Battle of the Somme, and no one has taken this as an insult to the memory of the fallen.