Israel's threatened bombing is of Iran's nuclear facility. Iran's threatened bombing of Israel is for the explicit purpose of eliminating its entire population. I understand how one could say that both involve weapons with the power of destruction, but the end results bring us to entirely different outcomes.
If Israel is successful in its attack, a nuclear facility will have been destroyed. If Iran is successful, 6 million people (the Jewish population of Israel today) will be exterminated. Depending on the target, Israel's 1.5 million Arab citizens will meet the same fate, as will Gaza's 1.5 million and the West Bank's 2.5 million residents (11.5 million people in all).*
To say that "both governments are equally dangerous with an absolute disregard for human rights," does not take any scale into effect.
From the sources you have quoted, Eman, and what I have read, I interpret this differently than Omar. The content itself was not limited (as evidence by Ahmadinejad's speech), but attendees decisions about what they wanted to hear were. There's a distinction there between individual choice– even if those individuals were representing organizations– and institutional censorship, as by the conference organizers, which does not seem to be the case.
FYI. For reference, commenter Rozita Ghotbi has quoted the text of Ahmadinejad's speech in English here: http://globalvoicesonline.org/2009/04/20/iran-diplomats-walk-out-at-ahmadinejads-speech/comment-page-3/#comments.
* Palestinian demographics sourced from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#Current_demographics
# 2009-04-22 at 22:18 pm
You are correct when you state that '"both governments are equally dangerous with an absolute disregard for human rights," does not take any scale into effect.'
However, once properly analysed, the scale of danger tilts firmly towards Israel.
To begin with, Iran does not possess nuclear weapons. If at some stage it procures nuclear warheads, its technology and missile deliverance capabilities will still be far inferior to Israel and the US.
It is extremely unlikely that Iran, even with nuclear weapons, would be able to use it in an offensive attack against countries with larger nuclear capabilities and greater technology. Unless, of course, Iran produces several hundred nuclear missiles and launches them all at once, which is again a highly unlikely scenario.
Secondly, you discount the fact that Iran, as all states, is rational in forming strategies. The country is well aware that if it were to target Israel, it would be annihilated ... as Hillary Clinton so accurately put it.
Thirdly, the procurement of nuclear weapons has been shown to be for defensive purposes. It is a deterrent against an attack, from say Israel. Never since World War II has a nuclear weapon been used for offensive purposes, and I can't see it being used in the near future (although the US is currently developing technology that would enable it to use mini-nuclear weapons).