Transcript of Ahmadinejad's U.N. Speech

I read it, thank you. I still have to say, everything he talked about made sense. It makes me mad that so many of our honchos walked out right before he had a chance to talk, or else unplugged their headphones. They could have learned something.

Soon Ahmadman will be swinging from a rope just like Sadman did, and just like so many Nazis did, and just like Heyman did in ancient Persia. Sure Iran has a few nukes, and they will use them against the west, but the more we wait, the more damage they will cause. Islam is no different than Nazi ideology in many significant respects.
I gave your article a "1".

Clarke, I skimmed through Ahmadinejad's speech quickly as it got a little overwhelming, and Ellsberg's speech is blocked by our schoo filter. Could you possibly give a synopsis of the main points of the two and what you hope to accomplish with this post? Thank you!

Gerry,
There are many accounts of Ahmadnejad's UN speech (CNN, NYTimes, the foreign media ). I note many leave out some essential points, just as did reports on the Columbia debate. It is good to keep in mind that Iran's foreign policy for over a decade has stressed becoming a prosperous, responsible nation seeking rapprochment with the United States and trade relations with all nations. It has not threatened to attack anyone. Mahmud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, is an elected member of a complex governmental structure that serves under the guidance of the clergy with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as supreme leader. Foreign policy is not determined by Ahmadinejad.

Even a cursory study of Iranian politics will show that it is not possible for the president's office to exercise dictatorial powers. It was shocking to hear Lee Bollinger of Columbia University make the stupid remark in which he called President Ahmadinejad a dictator. A possible explanation is the tendency in the United States of America to use stereotypes and to pigeonhole nations and cultures as either good guys and bad guys.

Daniel Ellsberg's speech is perhaps available to you at another url. One of its main points is to highlight the danger of Bush's warmongering rhetoric against Iran, as have many others, including top US military and those who served in high-ranking positions , not only in previous administrations , including his father's;but also in his own.

What a wonderful speech. How can we help support his effort from here in the US? Hiow can I write him a letter and tell him I agree with his ideas? thank you very much for this informative posting.!!

George,
I think telling politicians here we need to practice diplomacy as the Iraq Study Group stressed. Bush isn't seeking this. Unfortunately, the Iranians don't trust us to negatiate in good faith, as we have refused their many offers to. Ahmadinejad doesn't think the US would be no foolish as to attack Iran: he doesn't know American politics . He is a clever politcian but inexperienced and an "outsider" to the establisment , has a cocky, arrogant belief in himself and he has not done Iran a good service by boosting his own image among many nations. He is not liked by most Iranians.

Clarke, as a radical agnostic, I have put a wahfat on you. This is like a fatwa, except it needs to go on a diet.

Also, adhmadinejad is a war criminal because I can't spell his name without looking it up. Thus he will have to get in line behind the Mississippi River and the rhinoceros at the Hague to be tried.

Thank you very much for that explanation, Clarke. Your comments shed a lot of light on an area that I don't have much knowledge about and ring competely true to what I've seen about this administration.

Random Name,
"I have a dinner jacket" helps to remember how to say "Ahmadinejad."

Clarke,

That is helpful. What does "formal dress" look like in Iran. Is it Revolutionary Guard correct to dress in such?

It is sick and deluded that the US seeks to destroy what can become the most prosperous and democratic nation in the Middle East, instead of supporting it.

Clarke, you have presented a much needed accurate presentation of many sides of the most important issue of the time affecting everyone of us. I have read the links provided and the issues are very serious. At the rate we are going I see little chance of changing anything for the positive.

Those that comment as they do here on Gather will, in the end, get just what they deserve ...

I don't know if this was a typo, but the speech is dated 2006. Was that speech delivered a year ago?

Martin L. is a cretin. I'm sorry he watered down your rating. The man has a thing or two to learn about civility.

And speaking of that, the President and the president of the university who introduced Ahmadinejad are boors. They have unnecessarily demonized Iran. Bush should concentrate on what he already has on his plate instead of trying to expand the field of conflict further. If he does bomb Iran, it will set off a chain of events which will have serious implications for the world ... but given his desire to trigger Armageddon, I wonder if that is exactly what Bush wants.

Mark M.,
No , that's the right date. It stated Iran's basic policy, which has been consistent. They have been seeking ways to negotiate with the US for many years, while the US has been trying to pressure other nations not to trade with Iran and also the UN to apply sanctions. US best interests in dealing with its occupation of Iraq coincide with Iran's best interests regarding Iraq, that is having a stable , representative government in Baghdad. Since about 75% of the Kurd's trade is with Iran and the rest of Iraq is dependent on Iran for commerce , the visit of over a million pilgrims a year from Iran and technological assistance for reconstruction (Iran supplies electricity to parts of Iraq now), the US policy is damaging to Iraq's future.