PDA

View Full Version : Iranian Judo player refuses to match=up with Israeli athlete



PeedeeShaolin
25th August 04, 11:49 AM
Arash Miresmaeili is a two-time world champion in judo, and he carried the Iranian flag into the Olympic Stadium.

When he was scheduled to face off against an extremely overmatched Israeli he refused the match, telling the INRA(Iran's offical news group) that he was refusing to fight out of protest for the suffering people of Palestine.

In order to get out of it he gained a few pounds in order to be DQ'ed for weight reasons.

What do you think of this?

Before you kill him remember that the U.S.A. boycotted the ENTIRE Olympics because it was held in the U.S.S.R. and they were applauded as heros for standing up for their beliefs.

Chupacabra
25th August 04, 12:04 PM
that's cool i guess

Ronin
25th August 04, 12:06 PM
Old news.

knight_errant
25th August 04, 12:19 PM
I dunno. Iran is morally pretty offensive too. If it was the 100m or something I'd understand more, but it seems a pretty stupid reason for pulling out of a fight.

PeedeeShaolin
25th August 04, 12:21 PM
Old news.

I dont give a shit if it happened 90 years ago, all I want to know is what you THINK about it.

Nihilanthic
25th August 04, 12:54 PM
I think this whole "Death to Israel and all Israelis" BS has got to go. Its there now and you can't just disaplace the country and everyone in there again. And militarily I don't see the middle east stupid enough to try for what.. the 6th or 7th time?

Given my current thoughts on religion I just wish everyone over there would sit down and SHUT UP and stop fighting.

PeedeeShaolin
25th August 04, 01:01 PM
I think this whole "Death to Israel and all Israelis" BS has got to go.

I would agree, but this case had nothing to do with that. It was a peacefull protest out of respect for the Palestinian people. Very similar to the U.S. boycotting the Olympics.

Remember that it is ISRAEL who was declared in violation of international law by building a wall deep into the territory of another country. If someone was building a wall into U.S. territory the U.S. would respond with violence.

Gelid Light
25th August 04, 01:16 PM
Israel and the US along with it, is committing genocide against the Palestinian people, who are guilty of nothing but fighting back.



w w w . h a a r e t z . c o m


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last update - 02:39 07/07/2004
Professor, son killed in shootout
By Arnon Regular

Dr. Khaled Saleh, 50, a professor of engineering at Al-Jahah University, and his 16-year-old son, Mohammed, were inadvertently killed by Israel Defense Forces yesterday during a gun battle in the Ein Beit-Ilma refugee camp in Nablus with two leaders of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Yamen Faraj and Amjad Aram Hanani.

Diana Saleh, 23, the daughter of Dr. Saleh, was in the family's apartment on the second floor of the building at the time of the killings. Just before 3:00 A.M. yesterday, she said, following two hours of gunfighting and missile fire, IDF soldiers called out on megaphones to the building's residents, demanding that they leave the premises. The bullet fire, she explained, involved IDF soldiers and one armed Palestinian who locked himself inside the building. Her family's members crowded into one room, and waited for the gunfire to stop, she explained.

When her father heard this call to leave the building, "he tried to open the apartment's main door, but for some reason it was stuck. Then he called out from a window, yelling to soldiers `we cannot leave the house. The door won't open. We are people of peace. I am a university professor and there are children in the house.' A few seconds later he was shot in the chest."

According to Diana, who is an American citizen, a short time later her mother, Salam, 44, left the room where the family had been hiding and found her husband collapsed in a pool of blood. The mother returned to the room inside the apartment, and one bullet fired in the gun battle hit her son, Mohammed.

IDF troops did not allow medical teams to enter the building and take the father and son for treatment.

"Dr. Saleh and his son, Mohammed, were apparently killed by IDF gunfire, but there was no intention to shoot them," the IDF said in a statement. "Due to shots fired by the armed terrorist, soldiers were forced at various stages to shoot at all parts of the house and its roof; and it is possible that at one stage, soldiers failed to correctly identify the source of the shots fired at them, or were forced to shoot at suspicious movements within the building. The clash continued for several hours."

Relating to the issue of evacuating the mortally wounded Palestinians, the IDF stated: "As a result of the continuation of this clash, and the impossibility of knowing whether there were other terror suspects inside the building, it was impossible to allow medical teams inside. The removal of the IDF officer who was killed in this incident was also prolonged because the fighting continued without end."

The incident began at around 1:00 A.M., when naval commando fighters from Shayetet unit 13 clashed with the two PFLP terror suspects in a Nablus refugee camp. During this first skirmish, a Shayetet man, Captain Moran Vardi, was killed, and three IDF soldiers were wounded.

Also killed was terror suspect Amjad Aram Hanani, the deputy PFLP commander in Nablus. The commander of the Nablus PFLP, Yamen Faraj, 27, fled to the "Jabbar" building, and for two hours exchanged shots with IDF soldiers who circled the facility. Around 3:00 A.M. Faraj was spotted on the roof of the building, and IDF helicopters fired missiles, killing the PFLP suspect.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/448201.html

He was an American citizen.

knight_errant
25th August 04, 01:24 PM
Israel has been allowed to get away with crap that wouldn't be tolerated of any other 1st world country. That's for certain. But remember that a lot of Israelis DON'T support the repression of the palestinians- so why refuse to fight one without knowing? Sitting down and shutting up would be a hell of a lot easier if palestinians could count on equal treatment within Israel.

Xango
25th August 04, 05:14 PM
The point you're all missing is, he had no choice in the matter, not if he wanted to return to Iran, which is a totalitarian state. As it is, he was rewarded with some 120,000 dollars for his 'protest'. The alternative would have probably involved defection, and the possible imprisonment of his family.

Of course he refused to fight.

Xango
25th August 04, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by PeedeeShaolin

Remember that it is ISRAEL who was declared in violation of international law by building a wall deep into the territory of another country. If someone was building a wall into U.S. territory the U.S. would respond with violence.

If another 'country' had invaded the US three times in twenty years, that country would long ago have been either reduced to rubble or annexed and colonized. The US has done both of those things to Indian tribes and nations (Mexico in particular) that have gotten violent along the border. Israel is a model of restraint in comparison, especially when they gave the Sinai back to Egypt.

knight_errant
26th August 04, 05:54 AM
If another 'country' had invaded the US three times in twenty years, that country would long ago have been either reduced to rubble or annexed and colonized. The US has done both of those things to Indian tribes and nations (Mexico in particular) that have gotten violent along the border. Israel is a model of restraint in comparison, especially when they gave the Sinai back to Egypt.
On the other hand, when you talk about the US's colonisation behaviour, you are essentially talking about 19th century politics. The world has changed completely since then. Besides which, we're not just talking about invasion- Apartheid is the issue, I think.

SLJ
26th August 04, 06:53 AM
"he was rewarded with some 120,000 dollars for his 'protest'"

That's better than a medal.

CanuckMA
26th August 04, 11:34 AM
How about the wall that the EU is building?

WingChun Lawyer
26th August 04, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by knight_errant
On the other hand, when you talk about the US's colonisation behaviour, you are essentially talking about 19th century politics. The world has changed completely since then. Besides which, we're not just talking about invasion- Apartheid is the issue, I think.

I tend to agree with that view.

Canuck, which wall? I honestly donīt know what you are talking about.

Xango
26th August 04, 12:11 PM
The comparison to apartheid, while popular among those too lazy to think outside of analogies, is inept in the extreme.

Arab, Muslim citizens of Israel are not required to serve in the armed forces, and have limitations as to where they can live (recently imposed, and being challenged before the Supreme Court which will likely strike those laws down). Arab Druze citizens are required to serve, as are Arab Jews. Most of the Bedouin choose to serve, because it's their passport into Israeli life. Jews, also, have limitations as to where they can live. 95% of the land in Israel (non-occupied) is without restriction as to who can live there; we're talking about the Arab villages of the north and a few ultra-religious neighborhoods, and that's it.

All citizens of Israel are allowed to serve in the IDF, all citizens vote and can run for office, the law applies equally to all. The comparison to Apartheid comes because Palestinians do not get the treatment afforded to citizens. This is entirely due to their political status. An Arab living in Haifa might have the same last name, religion, and occupation as one living in Nablus, and may in fact be his second cousin; the Haifan will have full rights as a citizen, the Nablusi will not. The distinction is historical and political, not racial, and hence Apartheid is simply the wrong model for understanding the situation. In South Africa, just looking at someone could tell you their political lot. In Israel, you can't even tell someone's religion from their physical appearance, which is how Palestinians routinely disguise themselves as Jews to engage in terrorism.

What's actually going on is a long-ass military occupation that came out of repeated invasions and annihilatory rhetoric (and actions) on the part of Israel's neighbors. Israel was able to give the Sinai back to Egypt, but Egypt didn't want Gaza, and Jordan didn't want the West Bank, and the citizens of said regions (or at least their political representatives) want all of Israel cleansed of Jews so they can have it 'back'. The situation is substantially complicated by the settlements, which are too large to be ethically dismantled (I'm sure you're familiar with the principle that two wrongs don't make a right), and the wall is an attempt to separate the settlements from Palestinian land, while reducing the threat of terrorism. Incidentally, the wall is working quite well, as the number of terrorist attacks in Israel has plummeted.

Long term, I suspect that the West Bank will never be a viable political entity, and that annexation by Israel is inevitable. Equally, I bet Gaza, with its ocean access, could make a perfectly viable Mediterranean city state, with thirty times the area of Monaco and a comparably sized population. We'll see what happens; much depends on the willingness of the Palestinians to give up their literally suicidal struggle to ethnically cleanse the Levant of Jews.

Xango
26th August 04, 12:13 PM
Actually, Gaza has 225 times the area of Monaco, and 40 times the population.

Something to keep in mind the next time someone tells you that Gaza is the most crowded place on earth. :D

Freddy
26th August 04, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by Xango
The comparison to apartheid, while popular among those too lazy to think outside of analogies, is inept in the extreme.

Arab, Muslim citizens of Israel are not required to serve in the armed forces, and have limitations as to where they can live (recently imposed, and being challenged before the Supreme Court which will likely strike those laws down). Arab Druze citizens are required to serve, as are Arab Jews. Most of the Bedouin choose to serve, because it's their passport into Israeli life. Jews, also, have limitations as to where they can live. 95% of the land in Israel (non-occupied) is without restriction as to who can live there; we're talking about the Arab villages of the north and a few ultra-religious neighborhoods, and that's it.

All citizens of Israel are allowed to serve in the IDF, all citizens vote and can run for office, the law applies equally to all. The comparison to Apartheid comes because Palestinians do not get the treatment afforded to citizens. This is entirely due to their political status. An Arab living in Haifa might have the same last name, religion, and occupation as one living in Nablus, and may in fact be his second cousin; the Haifan will have full rights as a citizen, the Nablusi will not. The distinction is historical and political, not racial, and hence Apartheid is simply the wrong model for understanding the situation. In South Africa, just looking at someone could tell you their political lot. In Israel, you can't even tell someone's religion from their physical appearance, which is how Palestinians routinely disguise themselves as Jews to engage in terrorism.

What's actually going on is a long-ass military occupation that came out of repeated invasions and annihilatory rhetoric (and actions) on the part of Israel's neighbors. Israel was able to give the Sinai back to Egypt, but Egypt didn't want Gaza, and Jordan didn't want the West Bank, and the citizens of said regions (or at least their political representatives) want all of Israel cleansed of Jews so they can have it 'back'. The situation is substantially complicated by the settlements, which are too large to be ethically dismantled (I'm sure you're familiar with the principle that two wrongs don't make a right), and the wall is an attempt to separate the settlements from Palestinian land, while reducing the threat of terrorism. Incidentally, the wall is working quite well, as the number of terrorist attacks in Israel has plummeted.

Long term, I suspect that the West Bank will never be a viable political entity, and that annexation by Israel is inevitable. Equally, I bet Gaza, with its ocean access, could make a perfectly viable Mediterranean city state, with thirty times the area of Monaco and a comparably sized population. We'll see what happens; much depends on the willingness of the Palestinians to give up their literally suicidal struggle to ethnically cleanse the Levant of Jews.

A rather distorted and one sided view of the situation. Theres a term known as systemic discrimination. Nnot to mention spin doctor.