Goodbye to our Iranian friends.

Astonishing hypocrisy. An Israeli has least cause than ANYONE in the world to lecture on human rights issues. Iran will continue to exist long after the illegitimate state of Israel fails.

Go on and bleat and wail play the victim and cry when you are kicking someone on the ground and complaining because they are wearing out your shoe leather.

Now why is Isreal illigitimate??

Does this mean that you or someone is intent on destroying the country?

Scary thought!

o boy, here we go now, amazing it took this long for an elephant to wander into the room, and thanks to Ziggy for saying what was probably on a lot of folks' minds. even many scholarly Jews reject the apartheid "state" of Israel as a blasphemy against their own scriptures, not to mention their decades of ruthless and disproportionate abuse of Palestine. Israel has no legs to stand on regarding the nuclear debate since they have refused since the 70's to declare their "not so secret" arsenal, sign the non-proliferation treaty, and allow the IAEA to inspect their facilities. all the while they are crying, rattling sabres, and pointing fingers at Iran who has signed the NPT and allows the IAEA to agressively inspect their facilities far beyond what any other nation would accept. the game with Iran is the same as Iraq, forcing them to do the impossible by proving a negative, that they don't have any plans for a bomb. that is logically and practically impossible since it can always be alleged that they are still hiding something. perhaps Iran is hiding some things but can any rational thinking chess player blame them given the circumstances of over a decade of direct existential threats coming from Israel and her pitbull the US? North Korea has the bomb and it is the only thing that has deterred more aggressive western (US) intervention besides the reality that another war with N.Korea = a much bigger war with China. the reality is that any war with Iran would mean a much bigger war with Russia and perhaps even China. the current situation in Ukraine seems to be an attempt to "distract the defender" (Russia) from the ongoing problems in Syria and the continued push against Iran.  

Look up "USS Liberty" .

This thread has more nasty axes to grind than those 2 crazy Russian threads started about 2 weeks ago.  Yikes.

Where do you people get your news, in chat rooms with other zealots ??

War, War, We Want More ??  Take a chill pill, PLEASE.

I don’t get it. 

I thought I had asked a couple of simple questions; (1) Why do you consider Israel an illegitimate country and, (2) Does this mean that you or someone is intent on destroying the country?

Instead I get a response that is entirely composed of whining, complaining, moaning, groaning, and bellyaching how poor, old Iran is being picked on by a number of countries near, around, and far way from it.

Previous posts also included a lack of understanding about logical arguments, namely not responding to a question indicates a negative response to that question. There are others. But let's take a look at them.

When “tryst” spoke of, “Iran has never stated that they would like to bomb any country. That's just a lie”, he makes the mistake of Iran saying nothing about using bombs as proof that Iran said it will not use bombs”. But then how does one intend to destroy a nation? By bows and arrows? 

In the same post “tryst” said , “They have never said that they're building a nuclear weapon, nor have they said they are "willing to use it". But significantly Iran has stopped denying they are building one.

Finally, he also said, “Of course ad hominem fallacies are typical of the frustrated or the ignorant. But I didn't engage in that fallacy. I drew a conclusion based upon the propaganda you wrote that you must be ill-informed because all you did was repeat propaganda as fact.”. Apparently he doesn’t realize that even if his accusations are true, his previous comments still constitute in ad homien arguments.

And “Ziggy” has labeled one of my posts as “Pure parroted mainstream ignorance.”. That’s the whole response. Nothing to even try to offer a rebuttal, or even attempt to either answer a question or even admit Iran has any problems with its neighbors or itself.

But name calling is not restricted to me. Batgirl has been called naïve.

Other posters seem to want to scream the word “lies” without any providing any new information or even address the issues at hand.

Really, people, this post was about how we were going to miss our Iranian friends on chess.com now that their government has decided to block the internet from its population.

But if you people really wanted to help the Iranians, what are you doing to help them from this self-destructive and impending blanket of darkness? Are you raising money? Are you raising awareness? Are you writing letters to the Iranian leaders? Have you visited a library lately to find more information about Iran, the US, and other countries, so you could make a better and more informed case for your causes?

Or would you rather sit on a chair and whine, complain, moan, groan, and bellyache how Iran is being picked on by a number of countries.

once again i have not bothered to read Bf_P's comments mostly because i composed my last post before i had seen his, not in response. newsflash, it's not all about you. i'm going to get back to playing chess, and i suggest that the other adults in the room do the same. peace~*

Lets start with what an "ad hominem" is. It would be applicable if I tried to evade the subject of the argument by criticizing you. This didn't happen. I addressed the subject consistently, then I concluded that you attained your point of view through propaganda.

Now lets go to the point where you lied, which of course did happen. I have been following the issue of the U.S. vs Iran since about 2007. You stated that Iran not only admitted to building nuclear weapons, but also you claimed that they said they were going to use them! This is a lie. I don't know what else to tell you. You won't find a source from the Iranian leadership that anything like that was ever said. How am I so sure? Because this thread is not the first place where I've argued in defense of Iran. I've been practicing for years on various websites, where sources and links are required. But, if you wish to find a source, feel free to post it:)

If you were lucky enough to watch, listen to or read the speeches of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he was the president of Iran then you'll know that he constantly pushed for peace and not bombings. How you can say that Iran is for bombings is beyond me. And how you can say that Iran stopped saying that they weren't building nuclear bombs amazes me. Iran always says that their nuclear plants are not for bombs. They say it constantly and have not stopped saying it.

Of course, me being sure of something doesn't make it true. Since we don't know each other I wouldn't assume for you to trust me. So like you said, use "critical thinking", and do your own investigating.

And finally, the proper pronoun for me is "she" not "he". Thank you:)

I've been following the US vs. Iran since 1978 or 1979.

"Death to the America" was a common slogan coming from the militias and similar ideas were prorogated through the imams during that period.

Read closely to my last posts. I never said Iran was going to use atomic bombs to destroy a country.

This quote is from previous post;

*** When “tryst” spoke of, “Iran has never stated that they would like to bomb any country. That's just a lie”, he makes the mistake of Iran saying nothing about using bombs as proof that Iran said it will not use bombs”. But then how does one intend to destroy a nation? By bows and arrows? ***

Nowhere do I mention anything about atomic weapons. Neither did you. 

“If you were lucky enough to watch, listen to or read the speeches of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he was the president of Iran then you'll know that he constantly pushed for peace and not bombings.”

I did. And I was aghast when he denied the Holocaust occurred and implied that the existence of Israel was a major reason for the continued unrest in the Middle East. It doesn’t take much imagination to conclude that the way to peace in the Middle East was the elimination of Israel.

Of atomic bombs, I only said Iran was building them. And that was scary. Iran first denied it, then dropped the denial part when the evidence was too great for them to hide what they were doing.

They could not conceal the fact that they kept enriching uranium to weapons purity, nor could they explain why they were enriching at such a high level.

They could not explain why the inspectors were stopped at certain places during the inspection after they were promised they could visit them.

They could not hide the above ground factories, and even when they built them underground, they still could not conceal the arrangement of the buildings. And so on.

Which is why they are now, or were at, the bargaining table. If they still wanted to deny atomic weapon research, then why sit at the table?

*** And how you can say that Iran stopped saying that they weren't building nuclear bombs amazes me. Iran always says that their nuclear plants are not for bombs. ***

I didn’t say that. I said they had stopped denying they were building atomic bombs. There is a difference – in that when someone is denying something it is usually because they are answering a question. In your version, Iran was never asked about its nuclear program, they simply did not say anything or they made a proclamation. My version has it that Iran lied, yours does not.

And it takes other plants to build nuclear devices. Nuclear plants are factories that USE nuclear energy for power.

Notice how nothing is mentioned about centrifuges, filters, processing centers, enrichment centers, research facilities, and so on.

 *** Lets start with what an "ad hominem" is. It would be applicable if I tried to evade the subject of the argument by criticizing you. This didn't happen. I addressed the subject consistently, then I concluded that you attained your point of view through propaganda. ***

Not true. An ad hominem attack is still an attack, no matter the reason why it was made.

“You seem to absorb western propaganda like a sponge.” is a one line argument, and while not explicitly stating a conclusion, nevertheless implies one.

Finally, I apologize for referring you as a “he” not a “she”. I did not look up your profile. I am sorry about that. Will try to use to your preferred pronoun in all future messages.

• Argumentum ad hominem – the evasion of the actual topic by directing the attack at your opponent.

"... he denied the Holocaust occurred and implied that the existence of Israel was a major reason for the continued unrest in the Middle East. It doesn’t take much imagination to conclude that the way to peace in the Middle East was the elimination of Israel."

He didn't deny that the holocaust happened. He questioned why people in some european countries were imprisoned for denying the holocaust. He also questioned why people couldn't investigate the facts surrounding the holocaust, such as the number of victims, and the existence of gas chambers.  

It is a well known fact that Israel has caused many problems in the middle east. Ahmadinejad always said that the "zionist regime" would end. That is quite different than threatening to invade or bomb Israel. But on the flipside, the U.S. and Israel always threaten to bomb Iran.

Iran has not stopped denying that they are building nuclear bombs. That's in your imagination.

Iran hasn't hidden the fact that they are building nuclear reactors. They haven't hidden the fact that they are enriching uranium. There is no crime in that, just paranoia from Israel. 

You know what you may want to do is check out some Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein. They write and speak soooo clearly about the this issue as well as issues concerning Hezbollah, the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and Iran vs the U.S. They're very informative:)

The following is from Wikipedia:

“Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad frequently denied the Holocaust,[112] formally 'questioning' the reliability of the historical evidence,[113] although he on occasion confirmed belief in it.[114][115] In a December 2005 speech, Ahmadinejad said that a legend was fabricated and had been promoted to protect Israel. He said,

 They have fabricated a legend, under the name of the Massacre of the Jews, and they hold it higher than God himself, religion itself and the prophets themselves.... If somebody in their country questions God, nobody says anything, but if somebody denies the myth of the massacre of Jews, the Zionist loudspeakers and the governments in the pay of Zionism will start to scream.[116]”

Please see rest of article at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

 The BBC, Reuters, and other news organizations report similar.

None of them got their information from the US State Department. It was all out there for them to hear and read for themselves.

In this video, Ahmadinejad is asked about the Holocaust, what should happen to Israel, and if he still wanted to “wipe Israel off the face of the Earth”. He avoided answering any of the questions, most of which would have required a simple yes or no answer.

Here’s the video.                               

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykd-syzZ4ZY

And here is another video where he also avoids answering questions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0AKozyu8xU

Mr. Ahmadinejad has been quoted as saying the Holocaust did not happen and Israel should be wiped off the map. And when given the opportunities to deny or change what he meant (there were more than two videos on YouTube and other video web sites), he avoided answering the questions that would have changed people’s minds on what he said and what he meant.

“I see dead people”.

ha !! What  are   we  Thailand ?

There is nothing hypocritical about my post #113 above. It is sincerely extended to Iran and to Iranians. Many of them want to be free. Many Iranians live in forced exile ever since the Ayatullas came to power in Iran, and would love Iran to be free again. 

I sincerely wish and believe that the Iranian people will be free of Islamic tyranny within a few years, and that this whole Islamic craze, of trying to dominate the world, convert everybody to Islam and/or "kill the infidels" will become a crazy nightmare of the past within a few years, as public awareness of the issue rises further. 

Every democractic country in the world, although they are not "100% pure" and do have to defend themselves against crazy zealot regimes and organizations, was founded upon the hopes for human rights, freedom and equality in front of the law. They work day and night to try to make the dream a reality, despite opposition. 

On the other hand, criminals generally try to claim that everybody else is just like them. Their defense is "you are no better than me". If it was proven to a criminal that other people have good intentions, he would no longer feel justified in his murderous activities and may have a severe case of "cave-in".

Antisemitism and "anti-Israel-ism" could be understood under this light. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

Israel isn't perfect. It's a tiny country (the size of El-Salvador, or New Jersey) in the middle of a huge and hostile environment, which is trying - and very successfully so - to survive - to thrive - and to make hugely valuable contributions to planet Earth. 

If you're a "Jew hunter" but you're still kibitzing on this page, you're capable of doing so only thanks to computer and internet technology invented and made available to you by Israelis. So say "thank you". You're welcome. 

Islamic rule isn't good for people anywhere. 

What happens in Islamic countries?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - 

People are executed in the middle of the street, publicly - by hanging or by decapitation. Their heads may then be on display. 

Women aren't allowed to walk freely, to work or to have their face revealed. 

Women are murdered daily for "acting in a dishonorable way". They have no sexual liberty or even choice. 

Female children aged six to nine are forced to marry grown-up men. They may have public wedding ceremonies featuring multiple such "couples".

The children then sustain horrible injuries through having sexual intercourse forced on them, and in many cases the children die of these injuries shortly after being "married". 

Being gay is against the law and punishable by death. 

When someone is convicted of stealing, his whole arm is then forcefully cut off (amputated). This is Muslim Law, or Shariya. 

There is no freedom of expression. 

Christian people are driven away from Islamically-ruled countries and areas, or are outright murdered. 

Terrorism is funded and encouraged by such countries, and is then taking place elsewhere. 

Islamic people call Muslim-ruled countries "Dar Al Salam" - or "the house of peace". They call otherwise-ruled countries, where a Muslim minority exists - "Dar Il Harb" - literally "House of the Sword" - or "the house of war" - implying a continuous state of war in these countries (Europe, Israel, America) until the Muslims will inevitably win and inflict their rule upon the land. 

I trust and believe that most Muslims can't and won't tolerate this either, if given a decent, informed choice. 

The Internet does that daily. One day, Muslims will raise their heads and speak up for freedom, honesty and human rights. This day is not far away - more and more Muslims speak up already. They begin to muster the necessary courage to go against their own regimes of terror, hate and fear. 

- - - - - - - - - 

The scenes described above happen every day in Muslim-ruled countries.

We don't want this in America, We don't want this in Europe and we don't want this in Israel. I believe, again, most Muslims wouldn't want this either in Muslim-dominated countries. 

I predict that they will fight for their freedom and for their rights, and will largely achieve them, before this current decade is up. 

In the two videos you posted, which aresegments of longer interviews, I recommend them also. I don't think they show what you wish them to show, though. To me, these interviews should be read or listened to in their entirety. Did the holocaust happen? I'm quite satisfied with the many eyewitness accounts that it did happen. Does Ahmadinejad think it happened? I believe he does think it happened from everything I've read about him, but I think he has issues with some parts of the narrative, as I expressed above. 

 Ahmadinejad's view of the holocaust must be one of the strangest talking points for threatening to invade and bomb a country(Iran) that I've yet seen. But it is important to note that a man who was president of Iran, and therefore representing Iran to some degree, doesn't seem to have much in the way of "skeletons in his closet". It was refreshing for me not to come across a leader who was a murderer, thief, and pathological liar:) 

So does Ahmadinejad believe in the Holocaust or not?

Does Ahmadinejad' believe that Israel should be wiped off the face of map?

From what I posted, it seems like he does. And you can’t offer a rebuttal.

Ahmadinejad was a figurehead. The military runs Iran today, so who cares what he said or believed? As for evidence of the Halocaust, there are literally millions of documents that record the arrest, detention and murder of people the Nazis considered members of inferior races. There is so much evidence, in fact, that the UN  is stil cataloguing it.