You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran media: FDR was urged to wipe Israel off map!
2006-01-12
Tehran, Iran, Jan. 4 – Iran’s state-run media gave unusual prominence to a historically confused news report claiming that former Saudi King Abdul-Aziz, the father of the current Saudi monarch, objected to the existence of Israel and told United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt to relocate the Jewish state to Europe. Mehr news agency, which first carried the report that was later picked up by the country’s state-run radio and television and a number of government-owned dailies, wrote on Tuesday that in 1954 Abdul-Aziz, the father of present Saudi King Abdullah, met with President Roosevelt and protested the existence of the newly-founded state of Israel.
“The Jews must return to the lands they were driven out of and compensation must be paid to them by those who committed the crime and not those Arabs who were foreign spectators of this episode”, the Saudi King purportedly said, referring to the Holocaust during which some six million Jews were massacred in Nazi death camps.

“What harm have the Arabs done to the Jews of Europe? The Christian Germans were those who took away their homes and lives, so let the Germans pay back for this”, Iranian state media quoted Abdul-Aziz as saying.

The Iranian media gave extensive coverage to the report and quotations from King Abdul-Aziz were used to defend the recent statements by Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Iranian president has described the Holocaust as a “myth” and called for Israel to be “wiped off the map”. His comments have drawn international condemnation and have twice been rebuked at the Untied Nations Security Council.
But...
There is, however, one significant problem with what the Iranian media have been reporting; in 1954 both Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdul-Aziz were dead. The two leaders’ meeting was in 1934, not 1954, and at the time Israel did not exist. Contrary to Tehran’s version of history, Abdul-Aziz could not have possibly asked FDR to relocate the state of Israel to Europe.
Not to mention that Hitler's "Final Solution" was only an odd construction project in 1934.
Make haste Ranters, there are still a few seats left for the Spring Semester World History seminar series at the University of Tehran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Center for Global Awareness and Friendship.
Posted by:Creck Ulagum6581

#12  Maybe he had a seance with FDR?

Don't tell me it would be haram....as long as the spirit you contact says the Jooooos are EEEEVILLL it's ok. Really.
Posted by: Desert Blondie   2006-01-12 19:09  

#11  1. jews where there for 1000's of years before crossing into reurope and the rest of the world.2. Israel is still in better shape than most the arab countries in the first place. 3. didn't most the middle east side with the nazis' in WW2
Posted by: Jerelet Thineling2988   2006-01-12 16:00  

#10  #7
In conclusion, this is Dan Rather, reoprting....
Posted by: Master of Obvious 2006-01-12 12:46

Whahahahaaa.... I nearly pissed myself.

Posted by: Besoeker   2006-01-12 13:32  

#9  Shieldwolf-you have a point-they were smart. Didn't hurt that they had a strong instinct for self-preservation, either. But in regards to your comment about the Druze, doesn't that say more about the acceptance of Jews than it does about the tolerance of Muslims in "Palestine"?

No one says "all Arabs", but to deny that a large segment of Muslims Arabs have persecuted and continue to persecute Jews across Arabia FOR CENTURIES shows an unwillingness to acknowledge wrong where wrong exists. Just as Christians had to face some ugly truths about their history and themselves in facing what happened in the Holocaust and the Inquisition, Muslims now have some uncomfortable truths to face about themselves with regard to how they have treated and continue to treat Jews today. Deliberately killing civilian Jews, keeping for stories like Protocols of Zion at the top of bestseller lists, and favoring anti-Jewish militant groups like Hamas in elections don't convince me that Muslims Arabs are taking responsibility for their share of the troubles in the Israel/Palestine conflict- Druze or no Druze.

But why stop at Arabs? Persian Muslims have this chain around their neck for their bigotry against Jews-and their preseident presents the greatest threat to Jews in our time. So there is plenty of blame to go around-to those that need to face it.
Posted by: jules 2   2006-01-12 13:08  

#8  Tommorrow in Mehr. Chapter Two: Roosevelt gives King Abdul-Aziz a ride in the Top Secret Time Tunnel to 1954, where they talk about wiping Israel off the map and the New York Mets chances in the 1955 World Series.
Posted by: tu3031   2006-01-12 12:56  

#7  
In conclusion, this is Dan Rather, reoprting....
Posted by: Master of Obvious   2006-01-12 12:46  

#6  And if all of the Arabs were so against the Jews in Israel, why is it that the Bedou and Druze are not only elected members of the Israeli government, but are among the most commonly recruited members for the elite tracking and LRRP units of the Israelis? The smart Arabs saw the benefits of a new state that was democratic and jumped onboard at the very beginning.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2006-01-12 11:42  

#5  From the Thomas Lippman link:

"In his talks with Roosevelt, Eddy wrote, the king did not even hint at any desire for financial assistance.  "He traveled to the meeting seeking friends and not funds," and that is what he got, despite the arguments about Palestine and Jewish immigration.  The king's view was that if the suffering of the Jews had been caused by the Germans, Germans should pay the price for it; let the Jews build their homeland on the best lands in Germany, not on the territory of Arabs who had nothing to do with what happened to them.  The most he could get from Roosevelt was a promise that the president would "do nothing to assist the Jews against the Arabs and would make no move hostile to the Arab people." The king taking this as a commitment from the United States and not just from Roosevelt personally, was furious to discover three years later that Harry Truman did not consider himself bound by it. "

Very interesting articles-thanks, Spot, for the links. This excerpt above, however, does not address Arab (Muslim) complicity in mistreatment of Jews decades, centuries before WWII--mistreatment that continues to this day. That Arabs identify themselves as innocents in the what happened to Jews in WWII only reinforces the American view of them as cognitively challenged. There is history aplenty to prove Arabs have been ill-willed towards those of other religious beliefs. Only by honestly facing their own culpability in the unrolling of events leading to the Holocaust can Arabs improve the American view of Arabia.

Most ridiculously, to read this, one would think that there was no such thing as a Jew native to the lands of Palestine-a blatant and provocative lie.

Nor did the creation of the state of Israel have to be viewed as "against the Arabs"; had Muslim Arabs treated Jews as equals in law and in spirit, had they ceded .025% of total Middle Eastern lands to Jews to help create peace and stability in the region, as wise leaders might have, then this Israel-Palestine problem might have turned out differently. Instead, greed and bigotry against Jews had a karmic price for Muslim Arabs that continues to this day.
Posted by: jules 2   2006-01-12 11:23  

#4  From :the Council on Foreign relations
The [Yalta] summit ended on February 11, 1945 and FDR departed for a rendezvous at the Great Bitter Lake, a waypoint along the Suez Canal in Egypt, with Saudi Arabia's King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al-Saud. The King, known as Ibn Saud, sailed from Jeddah aboard an American warship to the meeting with FDR. The two leaders' focus was shaping the future relationship between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

and from an interview with Rachel Bronson:
The big issue they talked about was Palestine. FDR realized that Palestine was an emerging problem and he wanted King Abdulaziz's help.
Posted by: Spot   2006-01-12 10:40  

#3  Also Roosevelt died 4 years before Israel was declared a nation.
Posted by: mhw   2006-01-12 10:22  

#2  "in 1954 Abdul-Aziz, the father of present Saudi King Abdullah, met with President Roosevelt and protested the existence of the newly-founded state of Israel.

In 1954 FDR was dead nearly a decade.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2006-01-12 10:04  

#1  That commentary gave me a good early morning giggle. Thanks.
Posted by: jules 2   2006-01-12 10:03  

00:00