Via FLC
"... I received a copy from the New York Times of the BBC report on Nasrallah speech from 2005, which was cited in the correction today.
The report said:
"“would dry up the sources of finance, end moral, political and material support, stifle voices, whether they are the voices of the resistance or the voices which support the resistance, pressure states which protect the resistance in one way and another, and pressure the Lebanese state, Iran and Iraq, but especially the Lebanese state, in order to classify it as a state which supports terrorism.”
But I looked up the actual speech. Here is what he actually said:
"Due to the shelving of the military option by the Israelis, they resorted to two option. The first was to target the leaders of the resistance, and the second was to put a siege on the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine, politically and diplomatically, through a comprehensive plan...the Zionist effort seeks to convince countries of the world and the international community that the resistance in Lebanon, which Hizbullah constitutes its most prominent headline, is a terrorist organization...If the Zionists succeed in this, it will mean an international and global war on the resistance under the headline of "war on international terrorism" through a political and financial and media war and to pressure the states that protect the resistance especially in Lebanon, Syria and Iran. The Zionists who failed in their military and security confrontation in Lebanon are trying through political action and international relations to end the role of the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine. They want from the Lebanese and Palestinians to end the role of the resistance..."
As you can see, it is an entirely different meaning and words altogether.
PS Hamzah found an audio of the speech and he wrote me this: "Ok I found it ..it's at at minute 15..Funnily, what the US newspapers guys claims from sayyed [Hasan Nasrallah] is what he presents as Israel's thoughts not what he thinks."
PPS And in this full text of the speech he makes it clear that he was not speaking about what could happen but about he Zionist plans which he ridiculed and denied any presence of an international arm of the party--meaning, the entire speech refutes the very premise of the first article in the Times. He was talking about what the Zionists want to do and said that they think that they can "dry up the sources of funding, and to end the political, moral, and material sources of support, muzzling voices whether they are voices of resistance or voices supportive of resistance, and to pressure the states..."
Uprooted Palestinian 
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!
No comments:
Post a Comment