Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad full speech in English

[Dukhtar-e-Kabul]

YouTube - '9/11 was an inside job': Full speech by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at UN!

[Catya Sher]

I have watched a few of his full-length speeches, such as one back in early Feb.

I get SO much more out of watching the actual speech than the summaries by AP or other American or European news agencies. Those latter always drip with disdain !

I LIKE this guy! He's going to Heaven before almost anyone else alive today!

I'm planning to watch the video in the evening when I have time.

Thanks, Dukhtar-e-Kabul, great idea to present this.

[Admin Khan]

A lot of people were protesting about his presence. My University was quite annoyed.

[tor_khan]

The full transcript of the speech here:

http://gadebate.un.org/Portals/1/statements/634208557381562500IR_en.pdf

I love a maverick.

[tor_khan]

Western (and Arab) media sources are quick to write-off Ahmedinijad, but occasionally, it's worth considering the viewpoints of people like Castro, Hugo Chavez and all those other world political "nasties". This in particular for an American audience since the media reportage is not stacked in favour of anything that they say or do.

Let me quote from his speech, which I think provides some food for thought:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: One can analyze the current governance of the world by examining three events:

First, the event of the 11 September 2001 which has affected the whole world for almost a decade.

All of a sudden, the news of the attack on the twin towers was broadcast using numerous footages of the incident.

Almost all governments and known figures strongly condemned this incident.

But then a propaganda machine came into full force; it was implied that the whole world was exposed to a huge danger, namely terrorism, and that the only way to save the world would be to deploy forces into Afghanistan.

Eventually Afghanistan, and shortly thereafter Iraq were occupied.

Please take note:

It was said that some three thousands people were killed on the 11 September for which we are all very saddened. Yet, up until now, in Afghanistan and Iraq hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, millions wounded and displaced and the conflict is still going on and expanding.

In identifying those responsible for the attack, there were three viewpoints.

1- That a very powerful and complex terrorist group, able to successfully cross all layers of the American intelligence and security, carried out the attack. This is the main viewpoint advocated by American statesmen.

2- That some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime. The majority of the American people as well as other nations and politicians agree with this view.

3- It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported and took advantage of the situation. Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents. The main evidence linking the incident was a few passports found in the huge volume of rubble and a video of an individual whose place of domicile was unknown but it was announced that he had been involved in oil deals with some American officials. It was also covered up and said that due to the explosion and fire no trace of the suicide attackers was found.

There remain, however, a few questions to be answered:

1- Would it not have been sensible that first a thorough investigation should have been conducted by independent groups to conclusively identify the elements involved in the attack and then map out a rational plan to take measures against them?

2- Assuming the viewpoint of the American government, is it rational to launch a classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people to counter a terrorist group?

3- Was it not possible to act the way Iran countered the Riggi terrorist group who killed and wounded 400 innocent people in Iran. In the Iranian operation no innocent person was hurt.

It is proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group for the event of the 11 September so that in the future expressing views about it is not forbidden.

[Catya Sher]

Castro is horrible and Hugo Chavez is silly.
Don't put THEM in the same class as Ahmadinejad, who is very very intelligent.

A lot of Americans think the same way he does. But no one dares admit it.
There was a woman candidate for some office in Texas who DARED question the official explanation. In no time at all, after a barrage of screaming voices through the American media, she sheepishly "apologized".

How democratic is THIS system here in America by the way? How much controlled are increasingly all aspects of life that a mere candidate could not challenge the almost-communistic steamroller machine of enforced public opinion? Enforced by those behind the government here.

The same machine is the one which has lumped the President of Iran together with those two crazies. So that we all will write Ahmadinejad's truth off with a sneer.

Look at how carefully he explains everything.

The evidence has increased over recent months that the buildings were taken down by explosives planted inside. Even some American engineers analyzing what happened are contending this.

So I say the attempt by - guess who? - to defame Ahmadinejad is simply so that no Western audience will believe him. It's amazing to me how easily humans today, despite supposed "education" fall for this CLEAR TRAP !

[tor_khan]

Castro is horrible and Hugo Chavez is silly.
Don't put THEM in the same class as Ahmadinejad, who is very very intelligent.

A lot of Americans think the same way he does. But no one dares admit it.
There was a woman candidate for some office in Texas who DARED question the official explanation. In no time at all, after a barrage of screaming voices through the American media, she sheepishly "apologized".

How democratic is THIS system here in America by the way? How much controlled are increasingly all aspects of life that a mere candidate could not challenge the almost-communistic steamroller machine of enforced public opinion? Enforced by those behind the government here.

The same machine is the one which has lumped the President of Iran together with those two crazies. So that we all will write Ahmadinejad's truth off with a sneer.

Look at how carefully he explains everything.

The evidence has increased over recent months that the buildings were taken down by explosives planted inside. Even some American engineers analyzing what happened are contending this.

So I say the attempt by - guess who? - to defame Ahmadinejad is simply so that no Western audience will believe him. It's amazing to me how easily humans today, despite supposed "education" fall for this CLEAR TRAP !

Notice, now, Catya, how I didn't go anywhere near Kim Il Sung or Kim Jong Il, though in no way was I directly comparing Ahmedinijad to Castro and Chavez. Quite honestly, they've all made statements that could be taken with salt. But then would be very true of all world leaders, most of whom, I have come to accept as human and quite naturally flawed. To actually argue whether I meant to compare them is a distraction - I simply pointed out that, if listened to, they might have something valid to say.

What I don't like in leaders is arrogance and misplaced ego, and sadly the last US administration was just about that. Ahmedinijad is an interesting character, who, doesn't quite truthfully get a favourable press either here in the Arab world or in the western media. I did a brief study on him last year on media representation of certain stories, and my tutor really liked it. Like I say, he's something of a maverick. We could do with more of that, I say.

AS for the questions you raise - I just wish more Americans had the nerve to ask. It's one of the reasons I like European media's treatment of politics and politicians. They are spared little mercy, which is a good thing because politicians and men in grey suits try to pull the wool over our eyes time and time again. They tell us that we are free, and perhaps we might be freer in certain parts of the world, but I wonder sometimes, is it all for real? In biometric obsessed UK, the average person is caught on camera 300 times a day. Freedom? The Department for Homeland Security in the US. Are they really about protecting freedom?

That kind of freedom to me is an illusion and I daresay that you are probably freer to go about your business in many more parts of the world that are not so self-obsessed as the aforementioned.