quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Firmhand, he never said "wipe off the face of the map". No such phrase exists in Farsi. He actually said "remove this regime from the pages of time".

NG (and MasterKalif),

Good translation from one language to another is never about a word for word transliteration.  In fact, that way is a very bad way to translate.

Instead, you translate the sense and concepts from one language and culture to another.  "Wiping off the face of the earth" is not a literal translation of "remove this regime from the pages of time", but I'd hazard that the essential meaning is the same.

I've seen enough of the arguments on this subject to be convinced that the differing exact words is a distinction without a difference.

You tell me, though, what difference do you see in "remove this regime from the pages of time" from "wipe this country off the face of the earth"?  If you are trying to make some subtle distinction between the "government of Isael" and "Israelis", then I think you are reaching.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Interestingly, the more radical elements of the Middle East press misrepresented his statememnt (in the first instance). It served their purpose to stoke up tension with the West and Israel. Western media sources reported it without actually bothering to understand exactly what was said in Farsi - these sources included moderate Western media channels, not just those with a vested interest in painting the Iranian President as a lunatic.

Then, groups began to look into exactly what was said and Western Farsi experts (those who made the effort) agreed he said "we must remove this regime from the pages of time". Regime being the operative word.

Don't believe the Western news sources that simply reported what they were told he said, believe the Farsi speaking experts who translated his speech verbatim.

It seems to me, that there has been a lot of effort to re-interpret, re-define and put the best light on what he has said.  And it simply makes me more suspicious, because it is "the usual suspects".

However:

In a June 11, 2006 analysis of the translation controversy,  New York Times deputy foreign editor Ethan Bronner stated that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map. After noting the objections of critics such as Cole and Steele, Bronner said: "But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his Web site (www.president.ir/eng/), refer to wiping Israel away." Bronner stated: "So did Iran's president call for Israel to be wiped off the map? It certainly seems so. Did that amount to a call for war? That remains an open question."

FirmKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Firmhand, he never said "wipe off the face of the map". No such phrase exists in Farsi. He actually said "remove this regime from the pages of time".

NG (and MasterKalif),

Good translation from one language to another is never about a word for word transliteration.  In fact, that way is a very bad way to translate.

Instead, you translate the sense and concepts from one language and culture to another.  "Wiping off the face of the earth" is not a literal translation of "remove this regime from the pages of time", but I'd hazard that the essential meaning is the same.

I've seen enough of the arguments on this subject to be convinced that the differing exact words is a distinction without a difference.

You tell me, though, what difference do you see in "remove this regime from the pages of time" from "wipe this country off the face of the earth"?  If you are trying to make some subtle distinction between the "government of Isael" and "Israelis", then I think you are reaching.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Interestingly, the more radical elements of the Middle East press misrepresented his statememnt (in the first instance). It served their purpose to stoke up tension with the West and Israel. Western media sources reported it without actually bothering to understand exactly what was said in Farsi - these sources included moderate Western media channels, not just those with a vested interest in painting the Iranian President as a lunatic.

Then, groups began to look into exactly what was said and Western Farsi experts (those who made the effort) agreed he said "we must remove this regime from the pages of time". Regime being the operative word.

Don't believe the Western news sources that simply reported what they were told he said, believe the Farsi speaking experts who translated his speech verbatim.

It seems to me, that there has been a lot of effort to re-interpret, re-define and put the best light on what he has said.  And it simply makes me more suspicious, because it is "the usual suspects".

However:

In a June 11, 2006 analysis of the translation controversy,  New York Times deputy foreign editor Ethan Bronner stated that Ahmadinejad had in fact said that Israel was to be wiped off the map. After noting the objections of critics such as Cole and Steele, Bronner said: "But translators in Tehran who work for the president's office and the foreign ministry disagree with them. All official translations of Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement, including a description of it on his Web site (www.president.ir/eng/), refer to wiping Israel away." Bronner stated: "So did Iran's president call for Israel to be wiped off the map? It certainly seems so. Did that amount to a call for war? That remains an open question."

FirmKY

Firmhand, your post dances around the issue and doesn't address the central point.

You're "hazarding it means the same". I'd have to ask why you're jumping to this conclusion when in anyone's language a regime is not a country.

For example, the collapse of the Soviet regime in Eastern Europe did not lead to these countries being wiped off the face of the map. It lead to regime change.

As said, "wipe off the face of the map" is very convenient for the war mongerers on either side. The fact is however "wipe off the face of the map" is an English idiom and no such equivalent exists in Farsi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Firmhand, your post dances around the issue and doesn't address the central point.

You're "hazarding it means the same". I'd have to ask why you're jumping to this conclusion when in anyone's language a regime is not a country.

For example, the collapse of the Soviet regime in Eastern Europe did not lead to these countries being wiped off the face of the map. It lead to regime change.

As said, "wipe off the face of the map" is very convenient for the war mongerers on either side. The fact is however "wipe offf the face of the map" is an English idiom and no such equivalent exists in Farsi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

What kind of "regime" do you think Israel should have, then?  What's the logical conclusion?  Since a parliamentary democracy isn't acceptable - a king?  A dictator like most other countries in the area?

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

So farg you are basically saying that the entire Republic has been illegal from day one?

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Doctors like to give perscriptions down to the miligram.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

And, I'll ask you again - what is the protection that the Israeli people would have, if their government were destroyed?

quote:


And how would you destroy the government (wipe it from the pages of time, or however you wish to say it) of Israel without the concurrent destruction of the "civilian" population of Israel?

quote:


What, exactly is the argument you are proposing, anyway? That if the government of Israel would change overnight (a new regime) then everything would be hunky dory in the Middle East?

quote:


What kind of "regime" do you think Israel should have, then? What's the logical conclusion? Since a parliamentary democracy isn't acceptable - a king? A dictator like most other countries in the area?

quote:


And then what happens to the Jews?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sternhand4

Could you cite a reference where the FDA has lied to the public?

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You can put it in brownies and not smoke it at all...

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

I'm "hazarding" because I don't speak Farsi, and I doubt anyone on this board does.  I have, however, extensively studied at least two languages, and started study on a third.  At one time, I dreamed and thought in another language, so I do know that translation can be a tricky thing.

Did you not see my comments about the falsity of "literal translations"?  You could have a saying in one language, that literally translated might mean "he tapped the shoe on his head", while the actual meaning - translated to an equivalent English idiom - might mean "he was ready to boogie".

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

However, since the original translation, and even Ahmadinejad's governments own official translation used the "wipe them off the map" conversion

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

and it fits in with the common Middle Eastern theme of the destruction of Israel and the belief that Jewish are sub-human ("pigs" etc) not worthy of being treated as human beings, I don't really see how some people can make the argument that you seem to be making (and I'm not that certain what argument you actually are making).

quote:

ORIGINAL: cjenny

Heya I make that kind of butter! It rocks hehehe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You can put it in brownies and not smoke it at all...

Edited to add I am not a pot smoker, but I know a lot of people could benefit from medical usage of it