The Biggest Lie Told To The American People: Ahmadinejad's Alleged Remarks On Israel

As the Bush Administration beats the drums for another war of choice with another country that had nothing to do with 9/11, they are using another series of fabricated facts to indoctrinate the American people into thinking that Iran poses a serious threat to our security. At the core of these fabrications is the claim that on October 25, 2005, during a speech at the Ministry of Interior conference hall, the then newly-elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remarked that "Israel must be wiped off the map." As someone who was born in Tehran, lived there for seventeen years and is a native Farsi speaker, I have read the original transcripts of the speech in Farsi and want to inform you that Ahmadinejad never said "Israel must be wiped off the map," but rather, his statement was grossly mistranslated and taken out of context, perhaps to help make a case for military action against Iran.

Let's analyze what Ahmadinejad said. His exact words in Farsi were as follows: "Emam goft een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzegar mahv shavad."

The correct translation of the statement is as follows: "Imam said this occupying regime in Jerusalem must vanish from the page of times."

And the word-to-word translation of the statement is as follows: Emam: Imam (Khomeini, leader of the 1979 revolution); Goft: said; Een: this; Rezhim-e eshghalgar: occupying regime; Qods: Jorusalem; Bayad: must; Az: from; Safheye: page of; Ruzegar: times; Mahv shaved: vanish.

There are several important points to understand about this quote:

1) The original transcript does not contain the words "Israel," "wipe off" or "map."

2) Ahmadinejad in fact misquoted Imam Khomeini who really said "sahneyeh roozegar," or "stage of times," not "safheyeh roozegar."

3) "Occupying regime in Jerusalem " does not refer to the state of Israel because the word "regime" does not mean "state" or "country." Merriam-Webster defines the term "regime" as a "mode of rule or management" or "a government in power." Furthermore, the terms "stage of times" or "page of times" both are highly abstract and metaphorical terms and cannot possibly be translated to "map," which is a real object illustrating countries with defined political borders. To translate "page of times" to "map" shows a conscious effort to give people the idea that Ahmadinejad's statement was not a metaphorical expression of discontent but a real foreign policy declaration. This effort becomes even clearer when one learns that Ahmadinejad used the verb "vanish" - not "wiped off" - to describe what he wished would happen to the regime in Israel. Vanish is a transitive verb, meaning "to disappear." By definition, disappearance is something that an object does to itself or naturally happens to it without an outside party's intervention. "Wipe off," on the other hand, has a strong emphasis on the party that does the wiping off. In other words, as opposed to vanishing, things can't wipe themselves off; they require some external force to do the wiping off. By translating "mahv shavad" to "wiped off" instead of the correct translation "vanish," the translators consciously framed Ahmadinejad as implying that an outside party - i.e. Iran, by implication - should have a role in wiping off the regime in Israel while he was merely wishing an outcome on a regime he did not agree with. He could have said "wiped off" or "Iran will (or shall) wipe Israel (or the regime in Israel) off the map," but he did not. The U.S.'s official translation of his statement misrepresents what Ahmadinejad said or meant.

4) The fact that Ahmadinejad specifically mentioned the occupation of Jerusalem indicates the main reason for his discontent. It is certainly legitimate for one to wish the fall or disappearance of a regime - "a government in power" - based on the policies that that government has pursued. American presidents, public officials and various activists - including this blogger - have openly expressed hope that the regime in Iran would vanish, although for different reasons. The United States ' official policy throughout the entire Cold War was to actively pursue policies that would lead to communist regimes vanishing, and some may argue, that policy continues today. And groups like "The World Can't Wait" openly hope for the end of what they call the "Bush Regime." And it only takes basic research to find out that the Israeli "regime" has been illegally occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip, built settlements, built roads, expropriated land, deported, tortured and killed Palestinians, restricted freedom of movement, harmed the economy and made them impoverished for four decades, all in direct violation of international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention. And they have done all of this with U.S.'s aid and 47 vetoes of UN Security Council resolutions against Israel since the beginning of Reagan administration alone (Chomsky). Israeli regime has also militarily supported the military regime of Burma, which recently used Israeli weapons to kill pro-democracy civilians (British Jane's Intelligence Review). That is state sponsorship of terrorism. America is also a partner in this enterprise as it continues to give Israel 3 Billion Dollars of military aid every year. In fact, between one-third to one-fifth of the entire U.S.'s foreign aid goes to Israel each year.

Within that context, it is certainly a legitimate position to wish an outlaw regime that has defied the will and moral standards of the international community vanished and perhaps see it replaced with one that opposes apartheid. But to say that wishing a ruling regime, system of government of or ideology in a country vanished equates wishing that country vanished or the people in it harmed is an egregious departure from the truth.

Iranian regime's position on Israel is that there should be a referendum with both Jews and Arabs participating based on their right of self-determination to decide whether they want a single- or double-state solution. While Iran believes in a single-state solution, the country's official policy is to support the referendum. Besides, Iran has been issuing empty rhetoric against America and Israel since the 1979 revolution. Yet that is what they have been; empty rhetoric for domestic consumption, not a foreign policy doctrine. In fact, as opposed to the United States or Israel, Iran has not attacked a foreign country without provocation for over a hundred years.

I am fundamentally against the theocratic regime in Iran for its human rights violations and know that the reformist students' movement in Tehran can gain momentum again and lead to a nonviolent democratic change if given the time and opportunity. But as I speak with some of these students everyday, I sense how much anti-Ahmadinejad rhetoric from America is hurting their movement - especially when the rhetoric is based on lies - because those lies make it easier for the outlaw Iranian regime to call America out on those lies, undercut the West's legitimacy, rally the people around itself and cut the legs from under the pro-western reformers. One of these pro-democracy activists wrote to me the following in English on Sunday: "One should try to mainstream discussion of Israel in the US media. Israel is paranoid and paranoia in a place like the mid east is extremely dangerous. I dislike and despise A[h]madinejad, but I disagree with the way he's been portrayed and treated in the US. His reception at Colombia, for example, was every bit as despicable as he himself is! I think the greatest threa[t] to American hegemony is America's double standards. That's far more dangerous than Al Qaida."

The mistranslation originated from AlJazeera. Nonetheless, this blogger finds it difficult to believe that not a single Iran expert or Farsi speaker within the government has voiced concerns about the mistranslation. But this is not surprising as this oversight fits nicely into the larger pattern of this administration's - and Israel lobby's - distortion of facts to manufacture a false image of world affairs and create a false context within which he could sell another disastrous war of choice to the American people.

Follow Sam Sedaei on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SamSedaei

Comments

[dinger]

i'm jewish and don't subscribe to the policies of the AIPAC so enough talk about the "jewish" lobby. it's demeaning and hurtful. people on this site should no better.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Count me in.

Also, the Jewish press? Lump that stereotype in with the Jewish banks, etc.

It's the Jooooos who intentionally mistranslated the otherwise calm and reasonable gentleman from Persia.

[hoopoe]

actually, it was the iranian english news network that first bungled the translation - but it was the israeli press that picked it up, ran with it, and flogged it endlessly until the whole world believed, ignoring all of the official corrections.

every media outlet in the west has ignored attempts to rectify that erroneous and politically charged mistranslation, which now has a life of its own.

a quick internet search or a call to someone who speaks the language could have turned up the correct translation of that phrase for any responsible journalist doing the barest minimum of fact checking - but no one did. why?

[DontSpin]

Israel Lobby is real, and as long as they have such level of influence in our policy and push us to fight wars that are not ours to fight, they are fair game and should expect criticism. Last night we didn't say anything and they took us to Iraq to fight their war. Please read the book "Israel Lobby" and then tell me we shouldn't talk about them.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

The biggest winner in the Iraq war is... IRAN. And of the two, Iran is the consensus bigger threat to Israel.

And yet it's the Israel lobby.

Why would Israel do this to itself?

Please resolve this logic mess.

Until then, "It's the Jooooos."

[Transcendentobserver]

We can assume then that you are not part of the lobby. Do you have a voice in or access to an organization which opposes those positions to which you do not subscribe? How can we or should we effectively oppose those positions of AIPAC which clearly seem to be so odious to the international community in general and the middle east in particular.

[hoopoe]

agreed. this isn't about race, religion, ethnicity or identity - it's about politics and policy. it's important that people don't conflate jews or judaism with current israeli policy or practice. the israeli regime and pro-israel groups don't speak for all jews - any more than the bush administration speaks for all christians or the saudi regime speaks for all muslims. they are completely separate things. it isn't fair to lump them all together, and i'll be sure to be more specific with my statements in the future.

[Dandy12]

It is so typical to misquote one to make a point, or manipulate intelligence to make a point. Sounds like a pattern doesn't it?

[HeevenSteven]

The problem with this is the media. I've know about this translation problem for some time, but the only thing I've heard in the MSM is something like: "well there's some controversy about the exact translation".

It's not a philosophical question here; there is a more exact translation, as you've demonstrated, that the MSM can quote; but whenever the prez or some wing-nut speaks the misquote they don't get challenged on it.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Balance that with the volume of anti-Jewish and/or anti-American venom spewed in the Arab and Moslem world (noting Iran is not Arab) that does NOT get translated whatsoever for American consumption and evaluation.

[knosiswar]

You must be refering to the Saudi's who sponsor the Wahabi schools that teach HATRED for AMERICA, the country that produced 15 or 17 of the 19 WTC 9/11 highjackers. The country that produced Osama Bin Laden. To put that in context, The Bush's Arab cousins, the Saudi royal family that subjegates their population moreso than ANY OTHER ARAB NATION. The real enemy to America is America's Oil Corporations and their less than scrupulous business partners and the cronies in Washington that see to it that the oil flows this way and the money flows that way. Large sums of terrorist money run through Saudi and Dubai, but I suppose that dosen't count.

[trinity333]

This attempt to clean up the intent
of a infamous Israeli hater is indeed
sad. I'm afraid that one does not always make oneself (or a society) disappear, but history shows a lot of help often comes from outside forces. This little tyrant would love to perform Israel's "disappearing act", however if given the chance, he would surely do it not with smoke or magic mirrors but with nuclear force.
Sorry, that you are motivated to justify his blind hated.

[DontSpin]

This is an attempt to clean up the mistranslation that is completely off. I don't understand why people can continue to say wanting the regime in a country gone equates wiping that country "off the map." If you can't see the difference between regime and country, I'm not really sure what else to say.

[Doofus]

"Imam said this occupying regime in Jerusalem must vanish from the page of times."

And that doesn't translate to 'wiped off the map'?

You are *really* reaching here.

Unfortunately, when translating, one takes an
idiom in one language and replaces it with an
idiom in the other language. I'd say this one works
ok, assuming 'vanish from the page of time(s)'
means what it seems to.

Perhaps he was only referring to the newspaper,
or the magazine?

[BassMonk]

'Nation' is not the same as 'regime' or 'government'. A 'government' governs a 'nation', which is made up of citizens. Government and nation are two different animals, so to speak.

[Doofus]

I see. Wipe out the government, leave the
people alone. Just like we did in Iraq, right?
Just like we'd do in Iran (& a few other places),
given a chance. As long as they mean well, then
it's ok?

[JimR]

Many people would love to see the Bush regime vanish from the page of times. That does not mean they want the United States to be wiped off the map.

[Doofus]

That's a valid point, if those 'many people' are willing
to wait around peacefully until their wishes are granted.
If violence & armed force are to be involved, then we
would have a problem, no?

[fantagor]

I first read about this "error" a few weeks ago in a MySpace friend bulletin and have been spreading the word ever since.

Which is nice. But it would be even nicer if the press stopped repeating the "wipe Israel off the map" "quote" as though it were Gospel truth instead of propaganda.

And it's not just a meme of the neo-con hucksters who've usurped the Constitution. Keith Olbermann has repeated it, too!

Someone tell Keith to report the mistranslation and GET THE FACTS STRAIGHT.

No one ought bother to tell the White House, for since when has that vipers' nest cared about facts or truth?

Randy

[RogerHWerner]

Considering this situation in terms of realpolitik, an exact translation of Ahmadinejad's offending statements is rather besides the point. Presumably Ahmadinejad didn't just walk in out of the bean fields and the man isn't stupid, so he should have clearly understood that any statement suggesting the ending of Israel in however abstract the terms would be misconstrued and used against him. It would be as if Bush stood up and made a comparable statement about the Chinese regime. I'm not suggesting this is right but it is how the world of foreign politics works and most leaders know it. Therefore, it is the obligation of important political leaders to understand the political implications of their words, and, if their words are misunderstood, to offer precise public clarifications. If necessary they need to categorically and publicly reject misinterpretations. Regretfully, Ahmadinejad seems clueless and he blunders from one stupid statement to the next. Anyone with even a modicum of familiarity with Israel's history should know that the Israelis are not to be trifled with. You don't get into a bull fighting arena with a red cloth and not expect the bull to charge. A belligerent Iranian president doesn't stand up on the world stage and make bellicose statements about Israel and not expect them to be misconstrued for a worst case scenario. Israel would happily nuke Tehran and many other Iranian cities and not give a care about world opinion if their leadership feels such is necessary for the survival of Israel. Wars have begun over words and if political leaders don't know that then they have no right to lead.

[Liberterna]

May I remind you that the government of the United States regularly and clearly state that they wish to "institute regime change" in Iran.

If Iranian news papers translated that as "America wants to wipe Iran off the map" followed by the statement such as "America has not ruled out any military action against Iran, including a first strike using nuclear ballistic missiles"; you would see how this would be close enough to the facts to be defensible in a court of law yet clearly eschewed subtly and purposefully to give the incorrect impression.

Propaganda is subtle and repetitive.

Rome, Soviet Union, the Confederate States of America and The Holy Roman Empire all "vanished from the pages of time" that hardly means that Romans, Russians, Southerners and Eastern Europeans were massacred. (Ahmadinejad did refer to Rome and Soviet Union in the very speech made infamous by the translation)

Yet a second holocaust and the massacre of all Jews within Israel is always implied when reporting is done on Ahmadinejad. Jewish publications are even more reckless with regular Hitler analogies and point to point comparison with 1938 Germany.

The current regime in Iran (at least large and influential elements within it)deserve every scold we can throw at them. The human rights situation in Iran, the oppressive attempt by the government in Iran to control people's mind and wield them to their purposes is despicable. Yet LYING and double standards is hardly an answer the west should send if the wish to enlist the alliance of others to topple the regime in Iran.

We need as many allies as we can muster in order to gain control of the middle east (let's not BS anyone, that is our long term strategic goal or China and Russia will gain control of that region) And making up lies about one of the most populous and influential countries in the middle east and her people will only hurt us.

[Transcendentobserver]

Don't have to go that far away. How many Native American Native nations disappeared from the pages of history with territorial claims far more contemporaneous than the historical claims of Israel to Palestine. Hard to talk about that, huh?

[Liberterna]

Thank you Sam.

I had been aware of the gross mistranslation and have been pondering if it was just crappy translators or a conscious propaganda effort. As time passes by, it's becoming clear that the mistranslation was quite deliberate.

What makes me wonder is how is it that the ENTIRE US mainstream media (TV, News Papers) as well as the wired services (AP, Reuters) keep carrying the "wipe of the map" quote (always as 4 words never as the whole sentence).

It truly diminishes one's hope that we have an independent free press. How hard is it for CNN or New York Times etc... to get an independent translator to vet the accuracy of the official propaganda?

The demise of old media is well deserved, as they are no longer independent nor relevant, sites like huffington post and other blog oriented sites might be the future.

Thank you Sam, once again, your voice is a crucial one in this time of peril and war.

[StephenSmoliar]

I, too, am a firm believer of looking at the source text, rather than an account of that text delivered to us by either the government or the media. I personally think that the worst example of distortion thus far is the number that Associated Press reporter Lee Keath (I believe in naming names) did on the bin Laden video at the beginning of September. Those interested in a more level-headed account than the one AP delivered can find it at:

http://therehearsalstudio.blogspot.com/2007/09/no-time-for-simplistic-interpretation.html

[hoopoe]

thatnks for the link.

i've read that 'alternative' account, as well. all i can say is, never let the truth get in the way of a good story - especially one that sells so well... it is in certain interests to never allow bin laden to appear rational and reasonable, any more than they would allow ahmadinejad to appear so. they must look as insane and belligerent as possible at all times to keep up the healthy level of disgust and fear.

which is not to say i approve of either of those characters, but it would be nice to get the unfiltered, undigested truth and come to that conclusion on my own, without having it spoon-fed to me as distortions and lies. there is plenty about both of them to dislike without the propaganda.

[seawolf77]

Thank you for clarifying what I always knew to be true. These imnbeciles took what he said out of context, then paraphraed him. Clearly this is the way to exceptional translations, much like the huey of OBL saying wait wait there's more to follow regarding the 9/11 attacks. We cannot go to war with Iran. Russia and China will not allow it, and Russia controls the world energy markets and China controls out debt. So relax. This is just W scaring people, his favorite pastime. Dickey's too.

[cynara]

I hope your right...

[timm0]

We need Lieberman and his dance partner Hillary to step up here and 'splain to you how Iran is sponsoring terrsts... then you will change your pesky facts and learn to tow the company line!

(If HRC wins the Dem nomination, who wants to believe that lieberman will NOT be either VP or in a cabinet slot?)

[mellene]

The American government wouldn't even be talking about this is there was no oil to be "protected" for the use of the powerful corporations who rule this country's interests. We need a "people's" lobby to fight for the rights of the regular "people's" interests.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Thanks for the translation. It is clear the more facts we know the more bogus this Iran war movement becomes.

However, don't be fooled. Yes, Isreal would like us to do something about Iran, and yes, people who advocate attacks on Iran get standing ovations at AIPAC, but the push for this war is coming from Cheney and his cronies.

The fact that several news organizations are jewish-owned is a distraction. The biggest promoter of the Iran fraud (Fox) is owned by an Aussie protestant who is married to a Budhist (or Taoist). Face it news organizations benefit from war, they are the last people to go out of their way to stop it.

No..its Cheney who is pushing, and our gutless Congress that's letting this happen

[cynara]

Agreed, this is about oil, money, greed and power. That the Jewish lobby goes along with it, is just a happy bonus, that makes the neocons goal of world domination and world market control even easier.

[Plowboy]

It occurs to me that those wishing to prevent the next illegal war actions of Neoconned America are focussing on the wrong things. Trying to refute the lies told by those war wishers is bound to fail; they have control; of the media and most will never follow your analysis or thgink of your facts. They will keep hearing the same noise they have been hearing. So why shouldn't we start exposing the sources of this warmongering? Who has been sellinjg the ideas of culture or civilization clashes? Where did it start? How was it promoted? What else are itsw propagandists selling? What are the costs to America? What justifies our sacrifice to these interests?
Call things by their right name and you will eliminate much confusion.
And sometimes the best defense is a good offense. For much too long, people have been afraid of using it. Well, not all people: those wanting US to fight wars for them have been very aggressive in this regard.

[CriminallySane]

Inconvenient facts. They will not be read or attended to by anyone who really is in a position to either launch or forestall an attack on Iran. Bush, Cheney, and AIPAC want it, so it will happen.