US drops plan to put diplomats in Iran

By ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON

The Bush administration has shelved plans to set up a diplomatic outpost in Iran in part over fears it could affect the US presidential race or be interpreted as political meddling, The Associated Press has learned.

The proposal to send US diplomats to Teheran for the first time in three decades attracted great attention when it was floated seriously midyear, but has been placed on indefinite hold as November's election nears and Iran continues to defy demands to halt suspect nuclear activities, officials told the AP.

Two administration officials familiar with the matter spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration deliberations on the sensitive subject.

The officials said it had been decided to leave the decision to the next US president because it could be seen as a reward for Iran's nuclear intransigence especially when Iranian policy has become a major part of the heated campaign between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.

Obama has called for unconditional direct talks with the leaders of potential US foes like Iran and North Korea, assuming that groundwork laid by lower-level officials indicated that the top-level talks would be fruitful.

McCain has ridiculed the suggestion as naive.

Thus, opening an "interest section," or de-facto embassy, in Teheran could be interpreted as a Republican president helping a Republican nominee by neutralizing a distinction that might make the Democrat appealing. Or, it could be seen as hurting McCain by leaving him to defend a more hard-line position than the current Republican president.

Either way, the administration concluded that now was not the time.

"There is no desire to inject this into the campaign," the second official said.

The idea's demise represents the end of any marquee efforts to remake the US relationship with its most formidable Middle Eastern adversary before US President George W. Bush leaves office. Although Bush once called Iran part of an "axis of evil" and says Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is dangerous, he also had allowed a variety of tentative overtures toward Tehran.

The best-known effort would have had US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sit down for negotiations over Iran's disputed nuclear program, with the tantalizing prospect of expanded talks on other subjects. She said she would go anywhere to have those conversations, including Teheran, if Iran met its side of the bargain.

That offer went nowhere, in part because Iran refused to meet the US terms to begin talks.

A diplomatic office in Teheran would have served several purposes. It would provide a public face for the US government in a country where suspicion of the United States runs deep and perhaps increase US influence. It also might have made it easier for Iranian citizens to apply for visas to visit the United States.

The idea of creating an interest section in Iran similar to the one the United States runs in communist-run Cuba has been around for some years. It gained new traction in June when veteran diplomats began to look again at the plan with Rice's blessing.

Rice never publicly endorsed the concept but allowed it was one of several things the administration was considering to improve contact between the Iranian and American people. At one point, there was speculation that an announcement on the matter might be made in late August, which came and went with no action.

Although Iran has a small interest section in Washington, the two countries do not have diplomatic relations and the United States has had no official presence in Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution and subsequent takeover of the US Embassy and hostage crisis. US interests in Iran currently are handled by the Swiss Embassy.

While the Bush administration has given up on opening the interest section in its waning months in office, it has gone ahead with promoting unofficial contacts with Iran.

Late last month, the Treasury Department gave special permission to the private American-Iranian Council to open an office in Teheran. The office plans to promote educational and cultural exchanges by hosting round-table discussions and conferences.

The Princeton, New Jersey-based council will join a handful of other think tanks and policy institutes that have similar licenses from the Office of Foreign Assets Control to work in Iran, which is under heavy US sanctions over its nuclear program and support for groups the United States labels as terror organizations.

The executive director of the council, Brent Lollis, expressed hope that the opening of the office would improve ties between Iranian and American academics and eventually lawmakers. He also said he hoped it could help pave the way for the opening of a US interest section in Tehran.

"We are in full support of an interest section, and we hope that it will come about," he said. "This is a good beginning for that."

Oct 4, 2008 7:25 | Updated Oct 4, 2008 16:31

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1222017452942&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Pentagon Computer Hacker in Trouble Again

Canada: Israeli mastermind of global hacking scheme

Ehud Tenenbaum, who 10 years ago hacked Pentagon computers, detained on fraud charges

Court remands 'analyzer' Ehud Tenenbaum, suspected of hacking financial institution in Calgary, stealing CDN$1.8 million. Tenenbaum denies allegations; may face extradition to US for involvement in hacking scheme spanning hundreds of companies worldwide

Yael Levy

A Canadian court ruled over the weekend that 29-year-old Ehud Tenenbaum, an Israeli suspected of hacking a Canadian company's computer system and embezzling CDN$1.8 million, will remain in custody.

Tenenbaum, who was dubbed "the analyzer" after it was discovered that he was the mastermind behind the hacking of the Pentagon computer systems in the late 1990s, was arrested in September along with three other alleged accomplices, which were placed under house arrest Friday.

He may also face possible extradition to the United States, where there is an outstanding warrant for his arrest.

According to a Sunday report in Canada's Calgary Herald, Tenenbaum in suspected of hacking the systems of one of the city's leading financial institutes.

Tenenbaum was scheduled to be released on CDN$30,000 bail, which the court denied after the prosecution entered into evidence documentation suggesting he is the leading suspect in a US case investigating the hackings of hundreds of companies around the world, including some in the US, Russia, Turkey, Holland, Sweden and Belgium.

According to the report, Federal Crown Prosecutor David Gates told the court that "Mr. Tenenbaum is alleged, by the government of the US, to be one of the principal hackers, if not the mastermind, of their entire global operation.

"As of this day, over 100 financial institutions worldwide have been identified as targets of various (Internet) chats involving Mr. Tenenbaum," he said.

Attorney John James, representing Tenenbaum, denied his client's involvement in the acts, saying any actions he might have taken were all portrayed as part of his job for a systems' security company based in Montreal.

The US Federal Prosecution now has 60 days to file an official motion to have Tenenbaum extradited to the US.

Published: 10.05.08, 12:26 / Israel News

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3605401,00.html

John McCain's Granddaughters?

Religious girls refuse Shabbat rescue

Israeli backpackers trapped by snowstorm in remote Indian village treated to rescue mission by consulate, local air force, but two girls refuse to desecrate Shabbat by boarding helicopter

Itamar Eichner

Eleven Israeli backpackers were stranded in a snowstorm in northwestern India during the weekend, and rescued in a complex mission launched by the country's air force. But two other Israeli backpackers were left behind - refusing to be rescued as it would constitute desecration of Shabbat.

The remote village of Kaza, located in the Spiti valley in Himachal Pradesh, became shelter for around 150 tourists, 13 of them Israelis, who were trapped there during the raging storm.

Upon discovering that all access roads to the village had been closed off, including the one leading to Manali, the nearest city, the Israeli tourists contacted the embassy.

The backpackers asked Consul Irit Shneor in New Delhi to help them, telling her that earlier Belgium had sent a rescue helicopter to extricate the Belgian citizens trapped in the village. After conversing with Jerusalem the Israeli Embassy decided it, too, would send help.

IDF attache in New Delhi Colonel Yossi Turgeman contacted the Indian air force, which sent out a helicopter funded by the backpackers' insurance.

But the rescue mission left Saturday morning, which prompted two religious girls who were among those trapped to announce that they would refuse to board the helicopters, as this constituted desecration of the Sabbath. Their friends pleaded with them, citing the life-saving extenuation of the law, but they were adamant.

The 11 backpackers arrived safely at Buntar Airport in Kullu, India and called the consul to thank her. "When they all called from Kullu and yelled thanks into the phone they sounded euphoric," Shneor said happily.

The two religious girls remained trapped in the village along with 100 other European tourists. The consulate in New Delhi is currently in touch with them and attempting to assist them with the help of other foreign embassies.

Published: 09.28.08, 13:12 / Israel News

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3603183,00.html

Olmert: 'Jewish underground' behind attack on leftist prof.

[COMMENT: reminiscent of Jewish terrorism against the British in the 1930s and 1940s in Palestine.]

By Reuters

A new ultranationalist underground is apparently active in Israel and responsible for a bombing that wounded an outspoken critic of Jewish settlement in the West Bank, outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on Sunday.

"The security agencies have been ordered to deal with this case, investigate it and act with the utmost speed to bring to justice what appears to be another underground," Olmert told his cabinet in broadcast remarks.

Professor Zeev Sternhell, a political scientist at Jerusalem's Hebrew University and a leading opponent of settlement building in the Palestinian territories, was lightly wounded on Thursday when a pipe bomb exploded outside his home.

Police found posters in his Jerusalem neighborhood offering a NIS 1.1 million reward for the killing of a member of Israel's left-wing Peace Now movement.

Olmert compared the bombing with the 1995 assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a Jewish ultranationalist and a hand grenade attack that killed a Peace Now activist in 1983.

"A bad wind of extremism, hate, evil, violence and contempt for state authorities is blowing through certain sectors of the Israeli public and threatening Israeli democracy," said Olmert, who is engaged in land-for-peace talks with the Palestinians.

In the 1980s, a Jewish underground group, acting after six Jewish seminary students were killed in a Palestinian attack, carried out bombings that maimed several West Bank mayors and a shooting in an Islamic college that killed three students.

Last update - 20:20 28/09/2008

Members of the group were jailed but the sentences were later commuted by then-President Chaim Herzog.

Nine Israelis arrested for US lottery scam

QUOTE: American officials said it was the largest number of Israelis ever held on a single extradition request.

By ALLISON HOFFMAN, JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT, NEW YORK

US federal agents and Israeli police arrested nine Israelis in Tel Aviv and Ramat Gan on Friday on charges that they bilked New Yorkers out of more than $2 million through a lottery telemarketing scam.

They are accused of cold-calling people in New York from a "boiler-room" operation in Ramat Gan and asking them to wire as much as $40,000 to Israel to claim nonexistent international sweepstakes prizes.

The ring targeted senior citizens, who were told that the calls were coming from a New York law firm and that the wire transfers were taxes and fees that needed to be paid before the winnings could be released, according to an indictment filed in Manhattan federal court.

More than 10 victims were given a US toll-free number to call and told not to tell anyone about the prize drawing, prosecutors said. The money was allegedly wired via Western Union to accounts at Bank Leumi, Bank Hapoalim and Union Bank between September 2007 and this month.

American officials said it was the largest number of Israelis ever held on a single extradition request.

"Cooperation between law enforcement and prosecutors' offices here and in Israel has made clear that borders provide no safe haven for such fraudulent schemes," Michael Garcia, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement.

The Tel Aviv Fraud Division of the Israel Police, the Justice Ministry and the Tel Aviv District Attorney's Office all participated in the investigation. The suspects were initially detained by Israeli authorities on September 9 and 11.

If they are sent to the US, each defendant will face two counts of committing wire fraud through telemarketing and one of conspiracy to commit fraud. They could be sentenced up to 30 years in prison if convicted of all charges.

The nine who were arrested are due in Jerusalem District Court on Sunday for hearings on the US extradition request, according to prosecutors in New York.

A 10th suspect, Shai Kadosh, remains at large, officials said.

Sep 27, 2008 23:21 | Updated Sep 28, 2008 1:14

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1222017408189&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

US  MILITARY  BASE  ESTABLISHED  IN  ISRAEL

In 1973, when Israel was losing a war to Egypt, Prime Minister Golda Meir begged Richard Nixon to send arms and ammunition. She promised that Israel would never, never ask for US troops, but without the ammunition Egypt would win. Well, US troops are now stationed in Israel. No wonder George Bush is regarded as the best friend Israel ever had in the White House. (The interference by the US in 1973, turning an Arab victory into eventual defeat, was the direct cause of the oil embargo that caused a major energy crisis in our country.)

U.S. deploys radar system to detect Iranian missiles at Negev base

By Aluf Benn and Amos Harel

The U.S. Army's European Command deployed an early-warning radar system in Israel last week along with a 120-member support team, the weekly Defense News reported.

The move marks the first permanent presence in Israel of American military personnel. The high-powered radar system is meant to augment Israel's defenses against Iranian ground-to-ground missiles.

According to Defense News, more than a dozen transport aircraft delivered the radar, its ancillary systems, equipment and technicians, as well as maintenance and security specialists to the Nevatim Air Force Base in the Negev. It has not yet been made operational.

The same system has been deployed for the past two years in Japan against possible missile launches from North Korea. The agreement to provide Israel with the system a few months ago was finalized during the visit by Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi in Washington in July.

The new radar will give Israel added minutes to respond to a missile launch, compared with the systems it currently uses. Assisted by data sent from American satellites, the system can detect Iranian missiles shortly after they are launched.

A link with the Arrow missile system makes it possible to launch a defensive missile, and increases the chance of intercepting the incoming missile while giving the home front more time to respond.

The deployment of the radar system may be understood in two contradictory ways. One is that it prevents Israel from taking independent action against Iran, which the United States has made clear in recent months it opposes. The radar system, and Americans stationed here, will restrain Israel, which would be wary about launching an attack that would endanger U.S. personnel.

On the other hand, the deployment of the radar system strengthens Israel's defense against missiles if Israel and/or the United States attacks Iran's nuclear facilities. The defense system could reduce casualties and damage to the home front from a response by Iran and its allies.

This would give decision-makers more freedom to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Defense officials said they had made arrangements to receive the equipment and personnel in "record time" - two months from the July talks.

In recent weeks, Israeli sources have tried to play down the presence of an American force on Israeli soil and have portrayed it as temporary until operation of the system is transferred to the Israelis.

In any case, information from early-warning satellites, which greatly increases the radar's ability to pinpoint launches, will remain in American hands. The satellite ground station will be in Europe and transmit data to Israel.

The deployment of the radar system in Israel was an initiative by Republican Congressman Mark Kirk of Chicago, who, looking for a way to help Israel, persuaded the governments of both countries to implement the plan.

Israeli defense officials at first objected to the move, citing a possible limitation to the country's freedom of action. But they acquiesced when it was decided that the system would be supported by data from the U.S. early-warning satellite.

Last update - 03:13 28/09/2008

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1024888.html

Gaza: US, EU, Israeli Starvation Policy Backfires Bigtime

The Gaza blockade was supposed to starve the Palestinians so much that they threw Hamas out. But it has made smuggling so profitable that there may be as many as 500 tunnels to Egypt (another story gave an estimate by Hamas of 200). These food tunnels also can be used to smuggle the weapons and cash that Israel is so worried about: BIGTIME BACKFIRE for this starvation policy. (This story mentions smuggling a bride into Gaza, an earlier story mentioned smuggling animals for Gaza's Zoo !!!)

QUOTE: On some estimates there are now up to 500 passageways across to Egypt . . . a sprawling warren of hand-dug burrows now supplies everything from food, petrol and designer jeans through to guns, drugs and black market Marlboro cigarettes. . . Imposed last year after Gaza fell under the control of the militant Palestinian faction Hamas, the blockade was designed to make Hamas unpopular with Gaza's 1.4 million residents by banning virtually all trade with the outside world.

Inside Gaza's secret smuggling tunnels, the underground route to riches - or to death

With several tonnes of the world's most war-torn soil between us, the shouts of the Palestinian smuggling gang at the top of the tunnel's 30-foot deep shaft had become almost inaudible.

By Colin Freeman, in Gaza

Not that their lead tunneller had whispered particularly encouraging words as he lowered me down.

"The tunnels are very dangerous - they can easily collapse," smiled Ibrahim Abu Sazzar, 23, whose small, wiry build is just right for digging the 300 yard long passageways underneath the sandy border from the Gaza to Egypt.

"One time a day a tunnel caved in on my body and I was stuck for an hour, thinking I was about to die. But what can I do - I need the money to feed my family."

Welcome, if that is the word, to Gaza's "Tunnel Town", where with every perilous scoop of earth they dig, human moles like Mr Sazzar are quite literally undermining Israel's economic blockade.

Imposed last year after Gaza fell under the control of the militant Palestinian faction Hamas, the blockade was designed to make Hamas unpopular with Gaza's 1.4 million residents by banning virtually all trade with the outside world.

But deep beneath the watchtowers and fences of Gaza's 10-mile long border with Egypt, a sprawling warren of hand-dug burrows now supplies everything from food, petrol and designer jeans through to guns, drugs and black market Marlboro cigarettes.

Tunnel gangs charge premiums of up to 150 per cent on their cargos, raking in tens of thousands of dollars a week and making the excavation business one of Gaza's few growth industries.

"We bring through laptops, clothes, computers, medicines, mobile phones and even people," said Hisham al Loukh, 23, another tunneller. "There was even a bride from Egypt who came through one recently to get married to a man in Gaza."

The first tunnels underneath Gaza's perimeters were dug years ago, when they were they were primarily to smuggle weapons and explosives for use against Israel.

But it is during the blockade of the past year that the tunnellers' hazardous craft has really come to the fore. On some estimates there are now up to 500 passageways across to Egypt, mostly clustered around the town of Rafah, which straddles the border.

The tunnels usually surface in the gardens of villas on the Egyptian side of Rafah, where many residents are either sympathetic to the Palestinian cause or willing to lend their properties in return for a share of the lucrative profits.

Each member of a tunnelling gang, usually working in day and night shifts of 10 men each, earns around $15 per metre of passageway dug, which counts as a decent wage in an area which currently has 80 per cent unemployment. But as even the briefest of sojourns down into one of the tunnels makes clear, it is a risky living.

Entering one requires perching precariously on a makeshift wooden chairlift, which is then lowered down the 30 foot deep shaft by a winch powered by a sputtering petrol generator.

As in the Second World War film classic The Great Escape, the tunnel's walls are propped up with makeshift wooden planks, and equipped with ventilation pumps to freshen the musty, damp air at the bottom.

Diggers then use small electric drills to carve a path through the thick clay soil, steering their way by hand-held compass.

But otherwise, the engineering expertise has advanced little since the days of Tom, Dick and Harry. Tunnel collapses have led to dozens of fatalaties - so many that some local shops honour tunnellers in the same fashion as "martyred" local militants, displaying pictures of them clutching spades and drills rather than assault rifles.

The threat is not just from earthfalls. The Egyptian government, which has traditionally turned a blind eye to the tunnels because of historic sympathy for Gaza's Palestinian residents, is now under growing pressure from both Israel and the US to shut them down, and in recent months Egyptian border guards have started dynamiting any entrances that they discover.

"They also pump in water, poison gas, and even sewage," said Mr Sazzar. "But they do not stop us. If part of one tunnel gets blocked, we just dig a new branch in a different direction."

On the Gaza side, little effort is made to hide the tunnels, which lurk under a network of tents and jerry-built shacks along the border.

Israel, which withdrew its forces from Gaza in 2005, has occasionally sent warplanes to bomb the passageways, but has not done so since striking a cease-fire deal with Hamas three months ago.

Hamas itself used to impose strict controls on the tunnels' numbers, but has allowed them to proliferate in recent months, mindful that too much economic privation will dent its already wavering popularity with Gaza's impoverished residents.

There are also rumours that Hamas rakes in millions of dollars by imposing an unofficial "tax" on all tunnelled goods, although Dr Ahmed Yousef, a senior advisor in Hamas's foreign ministry, denies such claims.

"The tunnels have become a necessity with everybody tightening the rope around our necks," he said. "It is a safety valve to make goods available, because we cannot get them from Israel."

Tunnel entrepreneurs are now enjoying such good business, however, that they now have a vested interest in the status quo.

In recent months a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel has raised hopes that the economic blockade might be eased, but some in Gaza fear that should that ever look like happening, local tunnel owners will sabotage it by paying militants to fire rockets into Israel again.

Meanwhile, the list of tunnel "martyrs" continues to grow. The day after The Sunday Telegraph visited, a neighbouring tunnel at Rafah collapsed, killing three people and injuring five others.

Last Updated: 5:37PM BST 27 Sep 2008

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/3089367/Inside-Gazas-secret-smuggling-tunnels-the-underground-route-to-riches---or-to-death.html

Bush Denied Permission for Israel to Attack Iran

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran

US president told Israeli prime minister he would not back attack on Iran, senior European diplomatic sources tell Guardian

* Jonathan Steele * guardian.co.uk,

Israel gave serious thought this spring to launching a military strike on Iran's nuclear sites but was told by President George W Bush that he would not support it and did not expect to revise that view for the rest of his presidency, senior European diplomatic sources have told the Guardian.

The then prime minister, Ehud Olmert, used the occasion of Bush's trip to Israel for the 60th anniversary of the state's founding to raise the issue in a one-on-one meeting on May 14, the sources said. "He took it [the refusal of a US green light] as where they were at the moment, and that the US position was unlikely to change as long as Bush was in office", they added.

The sources work for a European head of government who met the Israeli leader some time after the Bush visit. Their talks were so sensitive that no note-takers attended, but the European leader subsequently divulged to his officials the highly sensitive contents of what Olmert had told him of Bush's position.

Bush's decision to refuse to offer any support for a strike on Iran appeared to be based on two factors, the sources said. One was US concern over Iran's likely retaliation, which would probably include a wave of attacks on US military and other personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as on shipping in the Persian Gulf.

The other was US anxiety that Israel would not succeed in disabling Iran's nuclear facilities in a single assault even with the use of dozens of aircraft. It could not mount a series of attacks over several days without risking full-scale war. So the benefits would not outweigh the costs.

Iran has repeatedly said it would react with force to any attack. Some western government analysts believe this could include asking Lebanon's Shia movement Hizbollah to strike at the US.

"It's over ten years since Hizbollah's last terror strike outside Israel, when it hit an Argentine-Israel association building in Buenos Aires [killing 85 people]", said one official. "There is a large Lebanese diaspora in Canada which must include some Hizbollah supporters. They could slip into the United States and take action".

Even if Israel were to launch an attack on Iran without US approval its planes could not reach their targets without the US becoming aware of their flightpath and having time to ask them to abandon their mission.

"The shortest route to Natanz lies across Iraq and the US has total control of Iraqi airspace", the official said. Natanz, about 100 miles north of Isfahan, is the site of an uranium enrichment plant.

In this context Iran would be bound to assume Bush had approved it, even if the White House denied fore-knowledge, raising the prospect of an attack against the US.

Several high-level Israeli officials have hinted over the last two years that Israel might strike Iran's nuclear facilities to prevent them being developed to provide sufficient weapons-grade uranium to make a nuclear bomb. Iran has always denied having such plans.

Olmert himself raised the possibility of an attack at a press conference during a visit to London last November, when he said sanctions were not enough to block Iran's nuclear programme.

"Economic sanctions are effective. They have an important impact already, but they are not sufficient. So there should be more. Up to where? Up until Iran will stop its nuclear programme," he said.

The revelation that Olmert was not merely sabre-rattling to try to frighten Iran but considered the option seriously enough to discuss it with Bush shows how concerned Israeli officials had become.

Bush's refusal to support an attack, and the strong suggestion he would not change his mind, is likely to end speculation that Washington might be preparing an "October surprise" before the US presidential election. Some analysts have argued that Bush would back an Israeli attack in an effort to help John McCain's campaign by creating an eve-of-poll security crisis.

Others have said that in the case of an Obama victory, the vice-president, Dick Cheney, the main White House hawk, would want to cripple Iran's nuclear programme in the dying weeks of Bush's term.

During Saddam Hussein's rule in 1981, Israeli aircraft successfully destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak shortly before it was due to start operating.

Last September they knocked out a buildings complex in northern Syria, which US officials later said had been a partly constructed nuclear reactor based on a North Korean design. Syria said the building was a military complex but had no links to a nuclear programme.

In contrast, Iran's nuclear facilities, which are officially described as intended only for civilian purposes, are dispersed around the country and some are in fortified bunkers underground.

In public, Bush gave no hint of his view that the military option had to be excluded. In a speech to the Knesset the following day he confined himself to telling Israel's parliament: "America stands with you in firmly opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. Permitting the world's leading sponsor of terror to possess the world's deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.''

Mark Regev, Olmert's spokesman, tonight reacted to the Guardian's story saying: "The need to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is raised at every meeting between the prime minister and foreign leaders. Israel prefers a diplomatic solution to this issue but all options must remain on the table. Your unnamed European source attributed words to the prime minister that were not spoken in any working meeting with foreign guests".

Three weeks after Bush's red light, on June 2, Israel mounted a massive air exercise covering several hundred miles in the eastern Mediterranean. It involved dozens of warplanes, including F-15s, F-16s and aerial refueling tankers.

The size and scope of the exercise ensured that the US and other nations in the region saw it, said a US official, who estimated the distance was about the same as from Israel to Natanz.

A few days later, Israel's deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its programme to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear programme."

The exercise and Mofaz's comments may have been designed to boost the Israeli government and military's own morale as well, perhaps, to persuade Bush to reconsider his veto. Last week Mofaz narrowly lost a primary within the ruling Kadima party to become Israel's next prime minister. Tzipi Livni, who won the contest, takes a less hawkish position.

The US announced two weeks ago that it would sell Israel 1,000 bunker-busting bombs. The move was interpreted by some analysts as a consolation prize for Israel after Bush told Olmert of his opposition to an attack on Iran. But it could also enhance Israel's attack options in case the next US president revives the military option.

The guided bomb unit-39 (GBU-39) has a penetration capacity equivalent to a one-tonne bomb. Israel already has some bunker-busters.

* Thursday September 25 2008 19:02 BST

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/25/iran.israelandthepalestinians1

Iran's President meets Larry King

American talkshow host Larry King interviews Iranian President Ahmadinejad

By Haaretz Service

Full transcript of the Larry King interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad courtesy of CNN:

LARRY KING, HOST: Mr. President, thank you for coming. Do you like coming to New York?

MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD, PRESIDENT, IRAN (through translator): In the name of God the compassionate, the merciful, well, this is the headquarters of the United Nations, and it is essential that we come here to meet with the heads of state and to promote the cooperation that is required for the management of world affairs today.

Of course, I am also extremely interested to speak with the American people.

KING: But there has been such hostility between the two countries, or at least the leaders of the two countries, do you think you can make steps forward in that regard?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Well, of course, the hostility has not been from our end. Up to this day, we have always been interested in having friendly relations. The hostility has been one-sided on the part of American politicians. And our nation has always defended itself against that hostility.

But it's clear that nations do not have any problems with one another and we don't have any issues with the American people. But when the American government uses the language of force, we have no choice but to defend against it.

We've done a lot, if you will recall, I sent a letter to Mr. Bush. The letter can be the start of a fresh endeavor and relation. We assisted in Iraq to establish safety and security as well as a new government.

And I also ask that we talk with one another in the United Nations.

KING: The president has not responded to your letter, has he?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I think that Mr. Bush has lost a lot of good opportunities, including these recent ones and initiatives by me.

KING: But he is leaving office. You will be dealing with a new president. By the way, do you have a preference among the American candidates?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): No. We do not a preference of any sort because we believe that these are issues relating to the domestic affairs of the United States, and decisions pertaining to that must be made by the American people.

And it's not important to us either. What matters essentially is that the president that is chosen by the American people should adopt a path and a policy approach and for us to observe that policy approach.

This is the campaign period. Anyone can say anything. So we disregard that. What matters is that once someone is in office, we have to watch and see if that person will make--bring about some changes in policy or continue the same old path.

I think that's more important than who is actually voted in office.

KING: Would you like to meet with Senator McCain or Senator Obama?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I have said that--in fact, on this very trip currently in New York, that I am ready to speak with presidential candidates before the press, with the presence of the members of the press and the media, and discuss world issues and debate them together.

I believe that we have really whatever we could to--in this respect.

KING: Why do you think they don't want to talk to you? Why do you think Bush, McCain, Obama, why don't they want to talk to you?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): You should ask that from them, don't ask me.

KING: Well, you are regarded...

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): We are for talks and dialogue.

KING: But you have been regarded as a hostile state. And there are many things that Americans worry about with regard to Iran. You would agree that you are, for want of a better word, a controversial figure. Are you not?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Our country of Iran has a historical presence that extends to 7,000 years. And never has the Iranian nation taken a misstep against another nation.

Throughout history it has demonstrated that it is a nation that is for peace and friendly with others. The war that occurred in the past century--the only war that confronted us in a major scale was Saddam Hussein's war against us.

That was, if you'll recall, supported by the U.S. government and a number of European governments against us, actually. And what we did was defend ourselves, innocently.

Of course, I will always defend the rights of my nation, the independence of my nation, with the rights--the legal rights of my nation. And this is the responsibility of every president.

But this defense does not mean that we must infringe on the rights of other nations, not at all. You are aware that in the course of the US attack on Iraq, we were asked in fact to enter into the coalition or the war to some extent--not the coalition, but the war, this to make up for the war that Saddam launched against us that went on for eight years.

So basically, getting to retaliate and revenge the war, in order words. So we refrained, we refused.

KING: But aren't you glad that the United States helped the world get rid of Saddam Hussein?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): How do you interpret the sort of different policy approaches that the US government adopts? And at times they contradict one another. Now for eight years Saddam was supported against us.

He bombarded Iranian cities and towns. He used chemical weapons against us. And in the meantime, the American government was giving support to Saddam. And then the US government went and overthrew Saddam.

Well, perhaps in the first instance we might have been happy. But when we realised that the US government is more interested in staying in Iraq, and to dominate, through its presence in Iraq, the region, we--I ask you, would you have been happy if you were in our shoes watching this?

KING: Mr. President, you were once a mayor. And we have a former mayor, now governor, Mrs. Palin, running for vice president. What do you think of her? Would you like to meet her?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I said that we've done whatever we need to with respect to this discussion. We've sent a letter to Mr. Bush and we also invited people here for a talk at the United Nations headquarters. And regionally in Afghanistan we assisted in bringing about security and safety. So we think it's now high time for the American officials to take the next steps.

KING: But you would meet with her? If she said, I would meet with you, you would meet with her?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I will await and see what evolves, happens. As for--we are interested (ph) in talking to one another we believe that talks and dialogue, things might be resolved much easier. Of course the dialogue that has been set by an environment based on respect and justice.

Now are you sure that she's going to become the president?

KING: No, no, no. I'm saying just that she's running, she's going to be, maybe, vice president.

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): She wants to become the vice president.

KING: Yes, I was just--you were both mayors, right? You have something in common.

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I wish that we would have talked together when we were both mayors.

(LAUGHTER)

KING: OK. One of the big fears the United States has, the world has about Iran, is nuclear weapons. Can you tell us what you're doing with regard to them? Are you building them? What is the status of your country and nuclear weapons?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): You've raised, in fact, three issues. The first is that you say that the world is afraid of Iran and concerned about it. I ask you, which part of the world are we speaking of?

Is it the case that the US government is the equivalent of the entire world and makes the case for that world? Is it the case that the US government has few of its allies to be considered as the whole world? No.

KING: All right. The Western...

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Not really. Let me tell you, well, you see, if you're talking about the Western states, I have to say, their concerns about us are not new. They've always been concerned. They were the ones who inspired Saddam to attack Iran and get us involved in an eight-year war. The terrorist groups that killed our president, prime minister, our officials, are now freely asked to live in the Western countries.

But let me tell you, 118 member states of the NAM, the Non-Aligned Movement, have actually supported our peaceful pursuit. Thirty-seven member states of the Organisation of Islamic States have also given their support to us in this regard. And there are many other organisations, multilateral organisations that have supported our endeavor and efforts so it's not the world, exactly, that's concerned about us.

And that's really the first point I have to clarify. The second point is in regards to the question of the bomb, we believe as a matter of religious teaching that we must be against any form of weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons. The production and the usage of nuclear weapons is one of the most abhorrent acts to our eyes.

In addition, we also believe that the atomic bomb has lost its use in political affairs in fact. The time for a nuclear bomb has ended. Whoever invests in it (unclear) is going the wrong way.

Was a nuclear bomb able to keep the Soviet Union intact and prevent its downfall? Was it able to bring victory for the United States either for Afghanistan or Iraq? Can it be used to that end? Can the nuclear bomb save the Zionist regime?

The time for bombs of that nature has ended. It is time for culture and reason to prevail.

There is also a third debate in the nuclear issue. We?re all aware that in fact the nuclear issue regarding Iran is a highly politicised one. It is, in fact, purely politicised. It's not a legal battle at all. The IAEA has visited-has mentioned, in fact, more than 12 times in its documents and verified that Iran's nuclear activities are of a peaceful nature. The agency says in fact that they have not detected any noncompliance or deviation on the part of Iran.

So I don't get that all our activities in that realm are legal. And peaceful.

KING: So you are open for inspection? To anyone who wants to inspect? That would take all the fears away if you would let the United States or any international body look in.

AHMADINEJAD: The largest number of inspections in the history of the IAEA has been done in Iran. We have offered the IAEA the largest number of documents in its history. No country in the world has cooperated with the agency as much as Iran has done.

And that's verified. But I'd like to ask you at the same, that there are countries that have nuclear weapons arsenal and are actually developing a new age nuclear warfare, should they not be inspected as well? Don't you think that their actually to be brought to an end as well?

Who exactly is the threat? Us working with the IAEA with their supervision mechanism while the IAEA has also said that they have not found any documentation that says that Iran has deviated from the peaceful path or really those who are now developing the fourth and fifth generation of nuclear weapons. And have historically in fact used the nuclear weapon.

Don't you think the Zionist regime needs some inspections as well? Isn't that a dual standard?

KING: We will pick up right with that regime, as you call it, right after this.

(Break)

KING: We're back. Mr. President, you mentioned the Zionist regime. You called-let me get this correct, you called for Israel to be wiped off the map. Now, since you say you are a peaceful nation, you don't mean militarily. You mean politically wiped off the map? What do you mean?

AHMADINEJAD: I think that I have to elaborate on two points here.

Today marks in fact the fourth year that I visited in New York City and the questions that are being asked of me are the same questions that were asked four years ago. Whereas the world, in fact, has undergone some tremendous changes, many developments have unfolded since then in the United States, in Europe and everywhere else around the world. Developments are new.

I have responded to this question many times before. The fact that we oppose the fundamentals of the Zionist regime is because of peace and justice. We see a viable peace. Perhaps as a journalist who has years of experience, you must be aware of what goes on there. The extent of the calamity, in other words, for over 60 years more than five million Palestinian have been displaced. People who were forced out of their homes.

And those who have stayed are being bombarded every day militarily. They are being killed in their homes at times. Women and children at times. Are besieged and medicine, water and food does not always reach them sufficiently. Children lose their lives as do women as a result at times.

Sometimes women die giving birth. Palestinian figures are assassinated and it goes to such extent that it's actually announced beforehand. Three big wars started by the Zionist regime. The last of which was in 2006 when they attacked Lebanon. So when will this calamity, this catastrophe end? Our solution is a humanitarian one.

KING: How?

AHMADINEJAD: What we say is that in the Palestinian territory there must be a free referendum and the Palestinian people should determine their own fate. This is the spirit and the letter of the Charter of the United Nations.

I'd ask you, I'd like to ask you, really, how is it possible to force out the people from one land and gather other people from around the world and let them live in the homes and others and establish a government. This is really a logic that is unacceptable. What are the Palestinians to do? The world community that the United States claims to speak for, how come does not embody the voices of the Palestinians?

KING: Why ...

AHMADINEJAD: Sixty years of this place ...

KING: Would you agree, and there are obviously disagreements there, would you agree to sit down with all of the people of the Middle East, Israel included, to work at some solution? You don't want harmful solutions, you don't want bombs, you don't want to obliterate a people. You want to do something politically. Why not sit down and talk, Israel included?

AHMADINEJAD: The Zionist regime is an uninvited guest, it is an occupier.

KING: But if you don't talk to them ...

AHMADINEJAD: ... is killing people-allow me-I'd like to ask you. If someone comes and occupies the United States as American people, would you give them any rights or would you force them out?

KING: But the world declared it a state. Israel is-that's a fact. You're not going to change that fact. Israel is a state.

So all I'm asking is, why not get together now and discuss their disagreements and hopefully come to some peace and bring about justice for Palestinians?

Why can't you? Israel, you're not going to change that.

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): The Apartheid regime of South Africa was a fact as well, where is it today? The Soviet Union was a fact as well, where is it today? Did the Soviet Union collapse as a result talks and dialogue, or as a result of resilient resistance? In other words, at times you have to resist.

You see, over 100 peace plans have been offered for the resolution of the Palestinian crisis, and all of them have been defeated. None of them have given results. Today the head of the Palestinian Authority, the Egyptian leader, many others have negotiated with the Zionists plenty of times, but has there been results? Hundreds of meetings and negotiations, what's the result so far...

(CROSSTALK)

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): ... except the expansion of the Zionist regime, the expansion of settlements, except for the escalation of tensions and terror and the killing of people? This regime is -- fundamentally is illegal.

KING: All right. Let me get a break. And then we'll ask for your answer, what is the solution? Don't go away.

(BREAK)

KING: We're back.

Mr. President, since violence is not the answer, and even if the Soviet Union did it without violence, South Africa did it without violence, what's the solution? How do we bring about this concept of peace everywhere? You don't want to see Israelis die, I assume you don't want to see Israelis die. You don't want to see Palestinians die. What's the answer?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Let me elaborate on two points in response the question. When we speak of a disappearing, what we're speaking of is that crime must disappear. Murders and killing must disappear, terror must disappear, aggression and occupation must disappear.

But our solution is like a very humanitarian and a very democratic one. What we're saying is that throughout the Palestinian territories, people should gather to determine the type of government that they'd like to have and have an election for that, free elections, for all, under the supervision of international organisations.

Let us give the Palestinians an opportunity to have self-determination. This is the only viable solution.

KING: But does Israel remain Israel?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Well, let the people decide. Why should we decide for the people? We must allow people to decide for themselves. It's their right to decide. I think that there are two reasons for--that account for the failure of the peace plans offered for Palestine.

The first reason is the disregard for the root cause of the problem. The Palestinian people were living in their lands. And they didn't have any problem. It was others who came and created problems for them. Well, so we really have to identify the roots of that and then seek the solution based on that reality.

And second reason is that the right of the Palestinian people for self-determination has been overlooked. Both have been overlooked. I've heard a lot that unfortunately, a group of people are trying to infuse the idea among the American people that Iran even wants to attack the United States, that Iran is a violent country or whatnot.

These are all false propaganda. When have we ever attacked? What we're saying is that we must allow free elections to happen in Palestine under the supervision of the United Nations.

And the Palestinian people, the displaced Palestinian people, or whoever considers Palestine its land, can participate in free elections. And then whatever happens as a result could happen.

KING: But you do not wish...

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Why--we can't decide for the people.

KING: You do not wish the Jewish people harm?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): No. You see, we have no problems with Jewish people. There are many Jews who live in Iran today. In Iran, for every 150,000 people, we have one representative at the parliament, or the Majles.

For the Jewish community, even though there are only 20,000 in Iraq, they still have one independent member in parliament who has the same prerogative as the other members of parliament.

But please pay attention to the fact that the Zionists are not Jews. They have no religion. They have no religion. They're neither Jews nor Christians nor Muslims. They just have--wear masks of religiosity. How can you possibly be religious and occupy the land of other people?

How can you call yourself a religious person and kill women and children?

KING: Well, they come from a...

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Women and children, women and children were (INAUDIBLE) as a result, cannot have access to medicine.

KING: Mr. President, do they not--I know you've denied this for some reason, but do they not--the Zionists, as you call them, do they not come from some history of persecution? Do they not come from the death of millions of men, women, and children? Is there not a birth (INAUDIBLE)--there's no birth (INAUDIBLE) in that. You don't think that happened?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): First and foremost, they specifically don't allow anyone to freely discuss the history that happened. They just say, this is our telling of the history and this is what happened. And everybody just listen to it.

KING: You say it didn't happen?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Let's just assume--what I'm saying is let more research be done on this--that history. There is a claim that the extent of the calamity was what it was. There are people who agree with it. There are people who disagree. Some completely deny it. Some absolutely agree with the whole account of it.

What we're saying is that we should have an impartial group go do their own research about the extent of the calamity that occurred and then announce a result of that.

Now but what I'd like is really to put this debate aside for a moment. Let's assume that it happened, the extent of which everyone is speaking of. Where did it happen? Did it happen in Palestine? Or did it happen in Europe?

KING: Well, it created Israel.

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): If it happened--it happened in Europe, if the crimes were committed in Europe, why should the Palestinian people be victimised as a result? Why don't the Europeans just give them a territory? Or in Alaska, perhaps. They could give them a territory anywhere they like.

But why pay from the pocket of some other people? It's as if somebody--you throw a party from the pocket of someone else. The Palestinian people had no role in that crime. They're innocent, completely.

KING: I'm going to have to--we'll ask the president about what he fears might happen. What's the worst fear? Right after this.

(BREAK)

KING: President, do you fear at all Israel or the United States attacking you?

AHMADINEJAD: Do you think they would do that?

KING: I'm asking you.

AHMADINEJAD: I have no concerns in that regard because they aren't able to do that because the worst thing the US government can do would be an attack. I think that in the United States there are enough reasonable people, smart people, who would not allow the US government to make such a big mistake.

KING: How about in Israel?

AHMADINEJAD: The same too. It's much smaller than that for an attack. It's way too small. It doesn't even factor into the equation of Iran's foreign policy. Iran is a vast country. Have you visited Iran?

KING: No, I am planning to next year.

AHMADINEJAD: Oh, oh! I have to tell you, I think the whole members of the press, the media, have to come and visit Iran. The Americans, I've noticed that in the news when they want to show Iran, they sort of show a small underdeveloped sort of desert-like country. Iran is an extremely big country and very developed and powerful, too.

With big (INAUDIBLE) people.

KING: By the way, you mentioned human rights in Israel. Don't you have some human rights problems of your own in Iran?

AHMADINEJAD: What do you mean by human rights problems?

KING: People protesting that they don't have the same rights as other people? Homosexuals, you said last year, you denied there were homosexuals-there's homosexuals everywhere.

AHMADINEJAD: I said it is not the way it is here. In Iran this is considered a very- bviously most people dislike it. And we have actually a law regarding it and the law is enforced. It is a law that was passed, it was legislated and it is an act that is against human principles. A lot of things can happen. It can cause psychological problems, social problems that affect the whole society.

Remember, that God rules our-to improve human life. In our religion this act is forbidden and the Parliament and legislature, not now, 70 years ago, something that happened 70 - before the Islamic Republic became ...

KING: So what happens ...

AHMADINEJAD: Let me - well, of course, nobody has held protests. You are-are you concerned for 70 million Iranian people or a few homosexuals?

Let's assume in Iran-let's assume in the United States that 200 million people drive cars and a million violators are rounded up and they just basically violate driving laws. Should we be worried for the 199 million people whose safety you must be concerned about or the 1 million violators? The law is the law. It's law. And it must be enforced, of course.

Of course we do pay attention that in Iran nobody interferes in the private lives of individuals. We have nothing to do with the private realm of people. This is at the-non private, public morality. In their own house, nobody ever interferes.

KING: More with the president of Iran in a minute.

(BREAK)

KING: All right. Mr. President, we have a few moments left. Do you want the United States out of Iraq right now?

AHMADINEJAD: If it can that would be the best scenario. But I think that it needs a timetable. That's what I think. A clear timetable so that it allows for their withdrawal over a period of time.

Because the presence of the United States there has not reduced tension and it has not limited terrorism, either. In fact, it has increased terrorism so we think that it will benefit everyone. It will benefit the Americans, the Iraqis and the region if the withdrawal happens but it needs a specific timeframe.

KING: Do you think relations between the two countries, the United States and Iran, can get better?

AHMADINEJAD: Definitely so. I want to remind you that the United States cut its relations with us unilaterally as a means to place pressure on us. Maybe the politicians back then in the United States saw that with the severance of ties, Iran will die or it will be weaker. But as this didn't happen, the reason was that they didn't understand the Iranian people, the nation.

The Iranian people are great people. A people with a rich civilisation and culture. Human beings who are big at heart, big intellectually. We have our talents (ph) around a humanitarian culture that prevails. And that kind of people can always run its own affairs and manage itself with dignity and well. And we've done that. It was the US government that cut ties with us, not us.

KING: But Senator Obama has said, Senator McCain has not, but he is open to diplomacy. Is that encouraging?

AHMADINEJAD: We are interested in having relations that are friendly and respectful. We prefer that and propose that but it is for the American government to decide what choices it wants to make and whatever choice they make, we will also take measures and organise our efforts accordingly. But we think that a relationship based on justice and respect will benefit all sides and that's our preference.

And we actually prefer this, that this be the case.

KING: Do you expect it?

AHMADINEJAD: I think that every government that comes to power in the United States must address a few sort of agenda items. The first is that it must finish the circle (INAUDIBLE) of the intervention of the United States abroad because these interventions and interferences bring about heavy cost to the American people, both materially and both in terms of the level of dignity of a people, the dignity of the American people around the world has been hard when you--other people, other nations do not have a good image of American people anymore.

And materially, you can tell for yourself what it has done to the American economy. I heard this recently, that $700 billion are to be infused to the financial institutions were it (INAUDIBLE) to be paid from the pocket of American people.

KING: I've got to take a break. We'll be back with our remaining moments right after this.

(BREAK)

AHDMADINEJAD (through translator): I just want to add a sentence regarding the last question before this, if you allow me. The US government must do two things. One, that it must limit the circle of its interventions abroad to the geography of the United States alone, rather than being involved in Afghanistan or elsewhere. The key is to invest the money of the American people for the American people, for their own health, for their own housing requirements, their own education requirements, employment requirements, their welfare to take care of areas that are afflicted by natural disaster.

And the second thing that the American people--government must do is fix the relations with Iran. Because Iran is an important country.

KING: Where would you like to go in the United States?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): I would have liked to visit different parts of the United States. On this trip through our mission here we asked to go to California and Los Angeles--wherever we can meet with the American people and to learn about them and their lives. We think that having talks is the best way.

The best approach, I think, that you, others in the media, the American people, must come and visit Iran. These visits will link our minds together. It will create an affinity--and we'll start liking each other.

KING: How many children do you have? Boy, girl, what?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): One girl and two sons.

KING: How old?

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): Two have been married. That means--well first they graduated and then they got married. And one is a student at the university.

KING: You don't look old enough to have married children.

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): In Iran we marry early.

KING: I thank you very much --

AHMADINEJAD (through translator): In America, too, I know the family is given a lot of value.

KING: We thank the president for joining us tonight for a very illuminating, fast paced hour. Hope you enjoyed it as well.

Tomorrow, Bill Clinton will be with us

Last update - 13:22 24/09/2008

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1024109.html

Wiesenthal Center Hate Poster Banned in Canada

QUOTE: City officials claimed the exhibit may "stereotype or promote views and ideas which are likely to promote discrimination, contempt or hatred for any persons".

Canada: Don't liken Ahmadinejad to Hitler

Toronto municipality prohibits Simon Wiesenthal Center from displaying poster featuring saluting Hitler and Iranian leader with burning devil over his shoulder as it 'may promote discrimination'. Center: Exhibit meant to be provocative because the situation is real and serious

Ohad Pas

TORONTO - The City of Toronto has prohibited the local chapter of the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies from displaying a poster titled "The Making of a War Criminal" featuring an image of Hitler saluting and a photo of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a burning devil over his shoulder.

The disputed poster was to be displayed as part of a travelling Holocaust exhibit in schools and institutions throughout the Canadian city.

City officials claimed the exhibit may "stereotype or promote views and ideas which are likely to promote discrimination, contempt or hatred for any persons".

Avi Benlolo, chief executive in the Canadian branch of the Wiesenthal Center said in response that "Ahmadinejad's threat to wipe Israel off the map - if that's not a call for genocide or another Holocaust, I don't know what is," said.

"We did this exhibit to press this case. It needs to be seen in public spaces," Benlolo said.

City councilor Mike Feldman defended the city's decision to edit the exhibit, saying "It's the city's responsibility to try to maintain a peace within the city. The city is erring on the side of caution. If we display that, then what will prevent any display from anyone else?"

He said he was concerned that the exhibit would provide a platform for Ahmadinejad's "very dangerous" ideas.

"I don't think anyone is applauding what this mad man is saying but ... I don't know what the (display) would accomplish," he said.

Benlolo, on his part, said the exhibit is not meant to be offensive.

"It's meant to be shocking," he said. "It is meant to be provocative because the situation is real and serious."

Published: 09.24.08, 11:17 / Israel News

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3601379,00.html