Ahmadinejad says Israel will soon disappear

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: bamacre
"Grave peril?" How so?

And really, I love it, keep asking what should be done, while offering nothing yourself.

Define "something."

Would you support an invasion of Iran if all other attempts proved failure?

We're going in circles here. Unlike you, I do not claim to know better, or have any better ideas than those the U.S. and the free world are already trying. Sanctions, security resolutions, strongly worded letters, talks, threats, deals, compromises, etc...

What's left? What hasn't been tried?

I was hoping that you'd surprise me and come up with some yet unheard of peaceful resolution to this mess. But, instead, you've suggested nothing... literally!

and that is simply not a viable solution... doing nothing would lead to catastrophe; as would an invasion. So here we are, with those two truths on the table, and neither one of us has any answers.

The only difference, perhaps, is that I suspect you truly support actually doing nothing... I don't think that you agree that it would lead to catastrophe, do you?

If I'm correct, and that is how you feel, then please tell me what you think will happen, globally, if we were to do absolutely nothing further to stop Iraq from obtaining nukes.

LOL, again, blame me for having no ideas when you only offer "something."

Look, it's not like Iran obtaining nukes is preferred. Not at all.

But I will support "nothing" accompanied by friendlier relations with Iran, UNTIL you or someone else has a better, yet peaceful, idea. Then I'll be happy to jump on board.

BUT, the idea has to be something more detailed than "something."

And you didn't answer my question. So again, would you support an invasion of Iran if all other attempts proved failure?

A simple "yes" or "no" will do.

 

[tvarad]

Aimster:

"& Iran's President does not control Iran's military."

Then that's just the problem isn't it. All the more reason for a pre-emptive strike so some nutcase in the Iranian military doesn't do something really stupid?

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: tvarad
Aimster:

"& Iran's President does not control Iran's military."

Then that's just the problem isn't it. All the more reason for a pre-emptive strike so some nutcase in the Iranian military doesn't do something really stupid?

& Iran has invaded what nation?

So you want to do a pre-emptive strike on a nation that has never attacked anyone to take out their ability of ever attacking another nation?

very nice.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: bamacre
And you didn't answer my question. So again, would you support an invasion of Iran if all other attempts proved failure?

A simple "yes" or "no" will do.

No.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Would solve two problems as Arab world would be wiped out at the same time. US tax payer get a break from supporting a client state.. and could even end worlds current scourge of Islam if Isreal goes after Mecca and Medina with cobalt tipped warheads making them uninhabitable for 2000 years. beloved patriot not possible thus Muslim not possible. I fail to see a problem with his comments. Seems since forever these parties in the ME have a death wish and need for perpetual war so how wouldn't it be in the worlds intrest to let them take one another out in one big bang once and for all? I would quote Machiavellian divide and conquer but we don't even have to divide they are forever divided and the rest of the world could sweep up the riches after they destroy one another.

In the world's interest? Most people in the world we live aren't interested any kind of nuclear confrontation, particularly not one that would kill millions of people, and wipe important religious cities off the map.

Also, I have no idea who came up with this "destroy mecca" theory, but that wouldn't end Islam. That's like saying that wiping out Rome would destroy Roman Catholicism.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: tvarad
Aimster:

"& Iran's President does not control Iran's military."

Then that's just the problem isn't it. All the more reason for a pre-emptive strike so some nutcase in the Iranian military doesn't do something really stupid?

& Iran has invaded what nation?

So you want to do a pre-emptive strike on a nation that has never attacked anyone to take out their ability of ever attacking another nation?

very nice.

Every attack that is conducted by Hezbollah is an attack orchestrated by, and attributed to, the government of Iran itself. Period.

That's a lot of attacks...

 

[DarkThinker]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Aimster
Why wouldn't I want the U.S to attack Iran? I hate the regime of Iran and the only way to get rid of them is by force. Just like the Iraqis who love the U.S for attacking Saddam I would love to the U.S for removing the Ayatollahs. I see nothing wrong with that.

I'd much rather see other Iranians take care of that themselves. Do enough of them possess the means and the courage to do so? And, once they're done, will the new government of moderates cease the uranium enrichment immediately?

John McCain is the one attending Christians for Israel rally and in those rallies they are welcoming the return of Christ which is basically the same thing as what the Muslims believe in. So if that guy becomes the next leader you can be sure he is going to attack Iran. You going to vote for him?

No, I'm an Obama supporter, and I do NOT want to see a war with Iran.

Those Arab nations will more than likely play a role in the whole thing by allowing the U.S to use their bases and ports.

Newsflash: The U.S. already has plenty of bases on three sides of Iran.

You can't just attack Iran by the air and go home and sleep the next day. Iran will keep launching rockets and artillery at U.S bases. U.S is going to have to send in some kind of land.

I don't think so. I believe our SOF, USAF, and USN could own them quite handily.

My mom has been working for the DOD for years and now she is contracted by the State Department to work for the embassy. She is a civilian. She hasn't left yet but she is leaving in a week.

Well, I hope she gets home safe.... and I vow not to comment further on your family.

Was Israel able to take out Hezbollah's rockets/missiles with their 300+ F-16s (Don't really know the number I assume 300-500)?

How will the U.S stop Iran's inventory?

No they weren't able to, but I'll tell what they were able to, set Lebanon back 20 years of progress. You see, there are downsides of having a proxy in your country, your country takes the beating!
Lebanon has taken a beating before for having the Palestenians and Co over...that was bad....
Lebanon has taken a beating before for having Nasrallah and Co operating as they please...that sucked....
Lebanon WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY MORE WARS ON IT"S LAND PERIOD!

We are SO done, we want to move the fck on. Israel has withdrawn from southern Lebanon back in 2000, as a Lebanese, all my conflict with Israel was over on that year all what the Lebanese people wanted after that was a permanent truce , I don't want us to have diplomatic relations with them, just a down to earth permanent truce (with no recognition), I don't want a single f* Israeli citizen to set a foot in my beautiful country (lest they start annexing land from it because G-d apparently promised them the land) and I sure as hell don't want to set a foot in Israel (Jewish settlers would shoot me on sight with the police looking the other way)

And the way it is so far, the Shiites of my country want to play heroes of the Arab world on the expense of the Sunnis and the Christians of my country. Every single country in the ME knows better than to mess with a US financed military titan......but the Shiites think their little gorilla fighters hiding under my toilet seat can defeat Israel in some way.
Iran is helping them realize those illusions with money....Iran needs to be labelled the new Israel IMHO, every single Arabic country should sanction trading with them, any Lebanese citizen having any contacts with Iranian govt (those are your Shiites mainly) is to be labelled a spy and executed on the spot on national television.

The wars on the expense of Lebanon need to end. It took the Sunnis and the Christians of my country +20 fcking years to drive away the invading Syrian forces out of Lebanon....where the hell was Hizbollah then? Where was this resistance back then? +20 fcking years of looting and political persecution...where the fck was Nasrallah? HE WAS SUCKING HAFEZ AL-ASSAD's DICK WITH PASSION...that's where he was....Hizbollah was taking arms and orders from Syria and they couldn't be happier....just as long as the Shiite areas in Lebanon were untouched. they would give a rat's ass about the rest of the people.

Fck Hizbollah that backwards hypocrite terrorist movement and may God willing I kill dozens of them one day in the streets of Beirut and the fields of Bekaa Valley. Amen

 

[tvarad]

Aimster:

"Was Israel able to take out Hezbollah's rockets/missiles with their 300+ F-16s (Don't really know the number I assume 300-500)?"

The only reason why Israel didn't clean out Hezbollocks was that it waged a "limited objectives" war (teach Hezbollah a lesson and try and retrieve their prisoners). Such a war has rarely worked, especially against an entity that has never submitted to responsibility. Israel could have wiped out all the places where Hezbollocks had hidden it's hardware with massive loss of human life. That would only be a pyrrhic victory. Please don't attribute it to Hezbollocks military genius. They are basically p*mping their Lebanese brethren for the Iran and Syria's pleasure.

"How will the U.S stop Iran's inventory? "

Such a scenario would make you figure it out.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran is not going to attack Israel

Thinking that is stupid.

If Iran wanted Israel destroyed it would start arming terrorist groups with chemical weapons.

The guy just speaks to get people hyped up... Persians do not care about Arabs. It's all B.S.
If Israel attacked the Arab world Iran would sit back and watch acting like they cared. In reality they don't care.

They just want to annoy the U.S

"I'm tired of swatting at flies."

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: tvarad
Aimster:

"Was Israel able to take out Hezbollah's rockets/missiles with their 300+ F-16s (Don't really know the number I assume 300-500)?"

The only reason why Israel didn't clean out Hezbollocks was that it waged a "limited objectives" war (teach Hezbollah a lesson and try and retrieve their prisoners). Such a war has rarely worked, especially against an entity that has never submitted to responsibility. Israel could have wiped out all the places where Hezbollocks had hidden it's hardware with massive loss of human life. That would only be a pyrrhic victory. Please don't attribute it to Hezbollocks military genius. They are basically p*mping their Lebanese brethren for the Iran and Syria's pleasure.

"How will the U.S stop Iran's inventory? "

Such a scenario would make you figure it out.

Israel gave Hezbollah everything they had. The only thing Israel didn't use was nuclear weapons. You must be joking if you think Israel was holding back on their attack.

Iran has nothing to do with Al Qaeda.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: DarkThinker

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Aimster
Why wouldn't I want the U.S to attack Iran? I hate the regime of Iran and the only way to get rid of them is by force. Just like the Iraqis who love the U.S for attacking Saddam I would love to the U.S for removing the Ayatollahs. I see nothing wrong with that.

I'd much rather see other Iranians take care of that themselves. Do enough of them possess the means and the courage to do so? And, once they're done, will the new government of moderates cease the uranium enrichment immediately?

John McCain is the one attending Christians for Israel rally and in those rallies they are welcoming the return of Christ which is basically the same thing as what the Muslims believe in. So if that guy becomes the next leader you can be sure he is going to attack Iran. You going to vote for him?

No, I'm an Obama supporter, and I do NOT want to see a war with Iran.

Those Arab nations will more than likely play a role in the whole thing by allowing the U.S to use their bases and ports.

Newsflash: The U.S. already has plenty of bases on three sides of Iran.

You can't just attack Iran by the air and go home and sleep the next day. Iran will keep launching rockets and artillery at U.S bases. U.S is going to have to send in some kind of land.

I don't think so. I believe our SOF, USAF, and USN could own them quite handily.

My mom has been working for the DOD for years and now she is contracted by the State Department to work for the embassy. She is a civilian. She hasn't left yet but she is leaving in a week.

Well, I hope she gets home safe.... and I vow not to comment further on your family.

Was Israel able to take out Hezbollah's rockets/missiles with their 300+ F-16s (Don't really know the number I assume 300-500)?

How will the U.S stop Iran's inventory?

No they weren't able to, but I'll tell what they were able to, set Lebanon back 20 years of progress. You see, there are downsides of having a proxy in your country, your country takes the beating!
Lebanon has taken a beating before for having the Palestenians and Co over...that was bad....
Lebanon has taken a beating before for having Nasrallah and Co operating as they please...that sucked....
Lebanon WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY MORE WARS ON IT"S LAND PERIOD!

We are SO done, we want to move the fck on. Israel has withdrawn from southern Lebanon back in 2000, as a Lebanese, all my conflict with Israel was over on that year all what the Lebanese people wanted after that was a permanent truce , I don't want us to have diplomatic relations with them, just a down to earth permanent truce (with no recognition), I don't want a single f* Israeli citizen to set a foot in my beautiful country (lest they start annexing land from it because G-d apparently promised them the land) and I sure as hell don't want to set a foot in Israel (Jewish settlers would shoot me on sight with the police looking the other way)

And the way it is so far, the Shiites of my country want to play heroes of the Arab world on the expense of the Sunnis and the Christians of my country. Every single country in the ME knows better than to mess with a US financed military titan......but the Shiites think their little gorilla fighters hiding under my toilet seat can defeat Israel in some way.
Iran is helping them realize those illusions with money....Iran needs to be labelled the new Israel IMHO, every single Arabic country should sanction trading with them, any Lebanese citizen having any contacts with Iranian govt (those are your Shiites mainly) is to be labelled a spy and executed on the spot on national television.

The wars on the expense of Lebanon need to end. It took the Sunnis and the Christians of my country +20 fcking years to drive away the invading Syrian forces out of Lebanon....where the hell was Hizbollah then? Where was this resistance back then? +20 fcking years of looting and political persecution...where the fck was Nasrallah? HE WAS SUCKING HAFEZ AL-ASSAD's DICK WITH PASSION...that's where he was....Hizbollah was taking arms and orders from Syria and they couldn't be happier....just as long as the Shiite areas in Lebanon were untouched. they would give a rat's ass about the rest of the people.

Fck Hizbollah that backwards hypocrite terrorist movement and may God willing I kill dozens of them one day in the streets of Beirut and the fields of Bekaa Valley. Amen

You might hate them but they have a huge backing. These people are not Iranians they are Lebanese.

Your country is held back because the Christians, Sunni and Shia do not know how to play nice. Doesn't it remind you of Iraq?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster
You might hate them but they have a huge backing. These people are not Iranians they are Lebanese.

Your country is held back because the Christians, Sunni and Shia do not know how to play nice. Doesn't it remind you of Iraq?

Well, Iran is certainly meddling in the violence there as well... hmmm... I think you're on to something... I think you've found the common link!

Great catch Aimster! :laugh:

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Aimster
You might hate them but they have a huge backing. These people are not Iranians they are Lebanese.

Your country is held back because the Christians, Sunni and Shia do not know how to play nice. Doesn't it remind you of Iraq?

Well, Iran is certainly meddling in the violence there as well... hmmm... I think you're on to something... I think you've found the common link!

Great catch Aimster! :laugh:

Iran has nothing to do with Shia and Sunni hating on each other.

You give Iran too much credit.

 

[tvarad]

Aimster:

"Israel gave Hezbollah everything they had. The only thing Israel didn't use was nuclear weapons. You must be joking if you think Israel was holding back on their attack."

If Israel had given everything they had, it would still be in Lebanon today.

"Iran has nothing to do with Al Qaeda."

After looking at the picture, I don't think the potential victim of such an attack (Washington, London, Tel Aviv or wherever) will be quibbling about whether it's Iran or Al Qaeda or whether Iran will or will not use the bomb if it got it's hands on it.

 

[Lemon law]

As another poster said earlier, every time Ahmadinejad opens his fool mouth, right wingers everywhere manage to get their panties all bunched up. And then run around like chicken little crying the sky is falling.

The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

But in a shorter term and just like GWB, Ahmadinejad's days are numbered. GWB's term ends 1/20/09 if we don't impeach him sooner and Ahmadinejad's term in office ends in
August/09. Unlike GWB, Ahmadinejad can run again, but he deeply unpopular with the Iranian people and with the religious authorities and is hence unlikely to even try to retain
his position. So in that sense, its Ahmadinejad who is going to be wiped off the political map. And with no Ahmadinejad to label the boogie man, we have to wonder what the unrealistic and fearful right will do when they are left with their panties all bunched up and no one to blame.

In terms of any nuclear weapons ambitions Iran may or may not have, even with a crash program, its likely to be 2015 or so before Iran can produce its first nuke, and another few decades more after that to reach any kind of level where they would be even competitive with what Israel has now. But lets also credit the Iranians with more brains than Syrians and Iraqis, Iran learned their lesson when Israel bombed Iraqi nuclear sites in the 1980's, and they buried their nuclear sites deep underground. If anyone thinks Israel can sortie a few planes with conventional bombs and wipe the Iranian sites out, they are nuttier than fruitcakes. Even the best conventional explosive bunker busters in the US arsenal may not be able to dent them. So its going to take nuclear powered bunker busters.

But we can come away from all this with one redeeming lesson to be found in Dicken's Christmas Carol. We can have positive impacts on Iran's decision to use nuclear energy to generate electricity in a peaceful manner. Then the future forks into two roads. One road leads to stopping there and the other road leads to a decision to go onto developing nuclear weapons. Iran is not yet at that cross roads and we can change or at least influence Iran not to take the latter road. But then we and not Iran are going to have to mend our ways. If we continue to poke Iran with sharp sticks at every opportunity, we will force Iran to take that latter road. And who could blame Iran because the fault will be ours.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

Yes, I'm sure this is what the holocaust denier meant. Because when I mean "returned to the UN mandated position as it existed in 1967", I too often find myself saying "wiped off the map." Thank god you'll never be in any position of power with the ability to affect US policy.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

Yes, I'm sure this is what the holocaust denier meant. Because when I mean "returned to the UN mandated position as it existed in 1967", I too often find myself saying "wiped off the map." Thank god you'll never be in any position of power with the ability to affect US policy.

Another truth.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

Yes, I'm sure this is what the holocaust denier meant. Because when I mean "returned to the UN mandated position as it existed in 1967", I too often find myself saying "wiped off the map." Thank god you'll never be in any position of power with the ability to affect US policy.

his exact words were "wipe the regime of Israel off the map"

of course the media leaves that part out when they quote him, which is really not a quote at all

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: tvarad
Aimster:

"Israel gave Hezbollah everything they had. The only thing Israel didn't use was nuclear weapons. You must be joking if you think Israel was holding back on their attack."

If Israel had given everything they had, it would still be in Lebanon today.

"Iran has nothing to do with Al Qaeda."

After looking at the picture, I don't think the potential victim of such an attack (Washington, London, Tel Aviv or wherever) will be quibbling about whether it's Iran or Al Qaeda or whether Iran will or will not use the bomb if it got it's hands on it.

Israel was losing men, equipment and was not advancing.

They pulled back as a result. The rockets kept coming in. More and more each day till the end.

You live in some fantasy world if you think Israel was babying Hezbollah. What is Israel stupid?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster
You live in some fantasy world if you think Israel was babying Hezbollah. What is Israel stupid?

Israel wasn't babying Hezbollah, they were bowing to the international pressure to avoid civilian deaths.

The fact that they did not do so may haunt them forever. After all, they're already getting blamed by shmucks like you for mercilessly targeting civilians, so how much worse could the PR have been?!

They could, and should, have destroyed southern Lebanon using conventional weapons.

Unfortunately, they did not.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: Aimster
You live in some fantasy world if you think Israel was babying Hezbollah. What is Israel stupid?

Israel wasn't babying Hezbollah, they were bowing to the international pressure to avoid civilian deaths.

The fact that they did not do so may haunt them forever. After all, they're already getting blamed by shmucks like you for mercilessly targeting civilians, so how much worse could the PR have been?!

They could, and should, have destroyed southern Lebanon using conventional weapons.

Unfortunately, they did not.

They did destroy souther Lebanon.
Show me a picture of one standing skyscraper.

 

[Aimster]

Both Amnesty International & Human Rights Watch have condemned Israel's actions that seemed to target civilians.

Jews and Arab hate each other. Give one a gun and they'll kill the other's kids and they won't lose sleep over it.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

Yes, I'm sure this is what the holocaust denier meant. Because when I mean "returned to the UN mandated position as it existed in 1967", I too often find myself saying "wiped off the map." Thank god you'll never be in any position of power with the ability to affect US policy.

his exact words were "wipe the regime of Israel off the map"

of course the media leaves that part out when they quote him, which is really not a quote at all

Bzzzt. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. You're right in blaming the media, but it was the Iranian government run media who is at fault. Nice try though.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

Yes, I'm sure this is what the holocaust denier meant. Because when I mean "returned to the UN mandated position as it existed in 1967", I too often find myself saying "wiped off the map." Thank god you'll never be in any position of power with the ability to affect US policy.

his exact words were "wipe the regime of Israel off the map"

of course the media leaves that part out when they quote him, which is really not a quote at all

Bzzzt. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. You're right in blaming the media, but it was the Iranian government run media who is at fault. Nice try though.

I watched the video and I understand it.

Did you watch him give the speech? Did you listen to him give the speech?

If so please share with me the link. I posted the video on here many many years ago when this issue came out.

He is clearly heard saying "We ask the Jews, Christians and Muslims to come together to help us wipe the regime of Israel off the map".

So go ahead post the speech or the video. I would love to see it.

Iran's news agency never denied he said what he said. Are you suggesting the Iranian President is against Jews?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The big fallacy here is that when Ahmadinejad says wiped off the map, he actually means Israel will be required to return to its pre-1967 borders which is actually the UN mandated position.

Yes, I'm sure this is what the holocaust denier meant. Because when I mean "returned to the UN mandated position as it existed in 1967", I too often find myself saying "wiped off the map." Thank god you'll never be in any position of power with the ability to affect US policy.

his exact words were "wipe the regime of Israel off the map"

of course the media leaves that part out when they quote him, which is really not a quote at all

Bzzzt. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. You're right in blaming the media, but it was the Iranian government run media who is at fault. Nice try though.

I watched the video and I understand it.

Did you watch him give the speech? Did you listen to him give the speech?

If so please share with me the link. I posted the video on here many many years ago when this issue came out.

He is clearly heard saying "We ask the Jews, Christians and Muslims to come together to help us wipe the regime of Israel off the map".

So go ahead post the speech or the video. I would love to see it.

Iran's news agency never denied he said what he said. Are you suggesting the Iranian President is against Jews?

We must be talking about 2 different speeches because the quote I find is "As the Imam says, Israel must be wiped off the map." Nothing about Jews and Christians and Muslims coming together.

And how can he can be clearly heard to say something in English when the speech at issue is one he spoke in Persian? Interesting. Even more interesting is that "wipe off the map" is an English idiom so how you could hear him say that very clearly in Persian impresses me. Do you have a universal translator device? Or is the above simply your personal translation? Better people than you have concluded what he actually said, and it's been hashed out here lots of times.

What does Al Jazeera think he said? http://english.aljazeera.net/E...rchive?ArchiveId=15816

Why did Erekat reject his words and say "What we need to be talking about is adding the state of Palestine to the map and not wiping Israel from the map"? Did Erekat also get it wrong?

After the initial worldwide condemnation, did Amedinijad come out and say he was misquoted or there was a mistake in translation? No, he defended his rhetoric and claimed all Iran was behind him.

Then still being called out eventually this "lost in translation" explanation surfaces. Revisionism at work. Not surprising for a guy who thinks the slaughter of 6 million people was a myth.