.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

The Asylum

Welcome to the Asylum. This is a site devoted to politics and current events in America, and around the globe. The THREE lunatics posting here are unabashed conservatives that go after the liberal lies and deceit prevalent in the debate of the day. We'd like to add that the views expressed here do not reflect the views of other inmates, nor were any inmates harmed in the creation of this site.

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Ahmadinejad Transcript From His United Nations Address

I will not comment much on this. This post is really serve nothing more than a place where you can read the transcript minus the Adobe Acrobat. All emphasis below is mine, and if you would rather read it from the pdf file, here is the link courtesy of fellow KeeBee, Fullosseous Flap's Blog.

I praise the Merciful, All-Knowing and Almighty God for blessing me with
another opportunity to address this Assembly on behalf of the great nation of Iran and to bring a number of issues to the attention of the international community.

I also praise the Almighty for the increasing vigilance of peoples across the
globe, their courageous presence in different international settings, and the brave expression of their views and aspirations regarding global issues.

Today, humanity passionately craves commitment to the Truth, devotion to
God, quest for Justice and respect for the dignity of human beings. Rejection of
domination and aggression, defense of the oppressed,and longing for peace constitute the legitimate demand of the peoples of the world, particularly the new generations and the spirited youth, who aspire a world free from decadence, aggression and injustice, and replete with love and compassion. The youth have a right to seek justice and the Truth; and they have a right to build their own future on the foundations of love, compassion and tranquility. And, I praise the Almighty for this immense blessing.

Madame President,

What afflicts humanity today is certainly not compatible with human dignity;
the Almighty has not created human beings so that they could transgress against others and oppress them.

By causing war and conflict, some are fast expanding their domination,
accumulating greater wealth and usurping all the resources, while others endure the resulting poverty, suffering and misery.

Some seek to rule the world relying on weapons and threats, while others live
in perpetual insecurity and danger. Some occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil and other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded daily in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets and alleys of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble.

I will give you three guesses to this one, but I know you will not even need the third one. America is the first nation he refers to--the "occupiers." The second nation comes as no surprise--Israel. Who else was fed the "guilty" images from the recent conflict. And you will read later where he focuses on that precise propoganda.

Such behavior is not worthy of human beings and runs counter to the Truth, to
justice and to human dignity. The fundamental question is that under such conditions, where should the oppressed seek justice? Who, or what organization defends the rights of the oppressed, and suppresses acts of aggression and oppression? Where is the seat of global justice?

A brief glance at a few examples of the most pressing global issues can further
illustrate the problem.

A. The unbridled expansion of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons

Some powers proudly announce their production of second and third
generations of nuclear weapons.

What do they need these weapons for?

Is the development and stockpiling of these deadly weapons designed to promote peace and democracy? Or, are these weapons, in fact, instruments of coercion and threat against other peoples and governments? How long should the people of the world live with the nightmare of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons?

Take note of that above. If President Ahmadinejad does gain the ability to make nuclear weapons, expect his crews to be working overtime constructing them. With an army like Hezbollah, and their ability to slip in and out of so many nations in the region, the threat of nucelar blackmail from this man would become a very real threat.

What bounds the powers producing and possessing these weapons? How can they be held accountable before the international community? And, are the inhabitants of these countries content with the waste of their wealth and resources for the production of such destructive arsenals?

The above is the first challenge Ahmadinejad hits the United Nations with. This, too, will pop up later in his address. He is calling into question the legitimacy the United Nations proclaims to have.

Is it not possible to rely on justice, ethics and wisdom instead of these instruments of death? Aren't wisdom and justice more compatible with peace and tranquility than nuclear, chemical and biological weapons? If wisdom, ethics and justice prevail, then oppression and aggression will be uprooted, threats will wither away and no reason will remain for conflict. This is a solid proposition because most global conflicts emanate from injustice, and from the powerful, not being contented with their own rights, striving to devour the rights of others.

Direct swipe at the United States, and a veiled one towards Israel. We already know that Ahmadinejad does not believe Israel has a right to exist, and he likewise believes the Jews stole the land from the Arabs. And by declaring us "occupiers" earlier, it makes sense that we would be the ones doing the devouring; at least it is to him. And if you were in his shoes, would you not think so? Too bad the Iraqis and Afghanis have a different word for it. Theirs is "freedom."

People across the globe embrace justice and are willing to sacrifice for its

Would it not be easier for global powers to ensure their longevity and win
hearts and minds through the championing of real promotion of justice, compassion and peace, than through continuing the proliferation of nuclear and chemical weapons and the threat of their use?

The peaceniks are going to love this guy. "Yes I'm all for peace, and don't mind the point of my sword." And where is Iran's championing of "justice?" Honor killings? Stonings? Hangings? Torture? State-sanctioned murder? Do not lecture this nation of its failings when it is glaringly obvious that their problems are much worse.

The experience of the threat and the use of nuclear weapons is before us. Has
it achieved anything for the perpetrators other than exacerbation of tension, hatred and animosity among nations?

B. Occupation of countries and exacerbation of hostilities

Occupation of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last three years.

Not a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold blood. The
occupiers are incapable of establishing security in Iraq. Despite the establishment of the lawful Government and National Assembly of Iraq, there are covert and overt efforts to heighten insecurity, magnify and aggravate differences within Iraqi society, and instigate civil strife.

The interview conducted recently by Hugh Hewiit with Genereal John Abizaid,/li> paints a much different picture than what President Ahmadinejad is painting. The differences in Iraq, these forces tearing at Iraqi society, are not coalition soldiers, but rather the terrorists. And he ought to know as he is supplying advanced IEDs to them.

There is no indication that the occupiers have the necessary political will to
eliminate the sources of instability. Numerous terrorists were apprehended by the Government of Iraq, only to be let loose under various pretexts by the occupiers.

Other way around, big guy. Iraq has instructed us to release several terrorists. Unless it is Osama, we are going to turn them over if we catch them, and the Iraqis want them. It is their country, and their choice. (I personally dislike this practice when it occurs, and take heart the next time we run into Mr. Terrorist, he dies.)

It seems that intensification of hostilities and terrorism serves as a pretext for
the continued presence of foreign forces in Iraq.

Where can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom should the
Government of Iraq seek justice?

Who can ensure Iraq's security? Insecurity in Iraq affects the entire region.

Can the Security Council play a role in restoring peace and security in Iraq, while the occupiers are themselves permanent members of the Council? Can the Security Council adopt a fair decision in this regard?

Consider the situation in Palestine:

The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War. Under
the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that War, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the control of some of the War survivors, bringing even larger population groups from elsewhere in the world, who had not been even affected by the Second World War; and a government was established in the territory of others with a population collected from across the world at the expense of driving millions of the rightful inhabitants of the land into a diaspora and homelessness.

(Pssst! It is all about the Jews!)

This is a great tragedy with hardly a precedent in history. Refugees continue to live in temporary refugee camps, and many have died still hoping to one day return to their land. Can any logic, law or legal reasoning justify this tragedy?

Can any member of the United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their own homeland?

Ask "Kooky" Kofi if he likes standing by the wayside while Rwanda was tearing itself apart, or the recent genocide in Darfur. Ask him his opinion of his own peacekeepers raping children in the Congo. Ask him if he feels the heartstrings for his homeland.

The pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif are
so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying to merely speak about them, as they are concerned that shedding light on the facts would undermine the raison d'ĂȘtre of this regime, as it has.
The tragedy does not end with the establishment of a regime in the territory of others. Regrettably, from its inception, that regime has been a constant source of threat and insecurity in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of regional countries, and has also been used by some powers as an instrument of division, coercion, and pressure on the people of the region. Reference to these historical realities may cause some disquiet among supporters of this regime. But these are sheer facts and not myth. History has unfolded before our eyes.

And now the question of Israel's existence fully comes into view as President Ahmadinejad lays out the typical anti-Semitic arguments regarding the legality of the establishment of Israel. The "constant source" he speaks of I find laughable as it is not Israel that starts the wars they are involved in. And, of course, the power that uses them he speaks of is America. He neglects to note that we did encourage Israel to respond to the kidnapping of its soldiers; they acted alone. And, indeed, history has unfolded before our eyes. I thought the world had learned this lesson the last time around.

Worst yet, is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this regime.
Just watch what is happening in the Palestinian land. People are being
bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered in their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the Security Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?

At the same time, a Government is formed democratically and through the free
choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian territory. But instead of receiving the support of the so-called champions of democracy, its Ministers and Members of Parliament are illegally abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international community.

Israel grabbed the ministers they knew were still a part of the militant wing of Hamas. And it occurred in their response to the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. And the kidnapping was preceded by Qassam rocket attacks into Israel proper. There was no Israeli aggression in the conflict.

Which council or international organization stands up to protect this brutally
besieged Government? And why can't the Security Council take any steps?

Let me here address Lebanon:

For thirty-three long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of fire and
bombs and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced
; meanwhile some members of the Security Council practically chose a path that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its objectives militarily. We witnessed that the Security Council of the United Nations was practically incapacitated by certain powers to even call for a ceasefire. The Security Council sat idly by for so many days, witnessing the cruel scenes of atrocities against the Lebanese while tragedies such as Qana were persistently repeated. Why?

The plight of the Lebanese, yes, we witnessed it in photos fauxtos from various news services. We saw the propoganda coming out regarding the Israeli attacks. And the complicity of Iran in the conflict was quickly hushed up by the same media outlets. He calls Israel the aggressor; This despite the fact that Nasrallah admitted to starting it, that the kidnappings and rocket attacks had been planned in advance. And Qana was debunked as a phony story, as well, and quickly at that. Ahmadinejad is a "blogger." He should know how we operate, and we were the ones who ppped the first red flags about Qana.

In all these cases, the answer is self-evident. When the power behind the
hostilities is itself a permanent member of the Security Council, how then can this Council fulfill its responsibilities?

C. Lack of respect for the rights of members of the international community

Excellencies, I now wish to refer to some of the grievances of the Iranian people and speak to the injustices against them.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed to the
NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there objections to our legally recognized rights?

Which governments object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear technology for non-peaceful ends including the production of nuclear bombs, and some even have a bleak record of using them against humanity.

Two bombs was well worth preventing the deaths of close to one million Marines that would have been lambs to the slaughter had the invasion of Japan occurred. We should thank God that President Truman made that tough decision the right way.

Which organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the Security
Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain powers from impeding scientific progress of other countries?

Um, when it comes to a regime that is based on religious fanaticism desiring to further its nuclear ambitions, and likely in the direction of nuclear weapons--said weapons allowed by religious fatwa despite years of them being frowned upon by Islamic clerics--then they answer is yes. We can prevent it. We have to prevent it. A nuclear armed, modern-day Hitler is not a prospect I would like to live through.

The abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and coercion, is
indeed a source of grave concern.

Some permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are
themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten others with the Security Council and declare, even before any decision by the Council, the
condemnation of their opponents by the Council. The question is: what can justify such exploitation of the Security Council, and doesn't it erode the credibility and effectiveness of the Council? Can such behavior contribute to the ability of the Council to maintain security?

A review of the preceding historical realities would lead to the conclusion that
regrettably, justice has become a victim of force and aggression.

Many global arrangements have become unjust, discriminatory and irresponsible as a result of undue pressure from some of the powerful; Threats with nuclear weapons and other instruments of war by some powers have taken the place of respect for the rights of nations and the maintenance and promotion of peace and tranquility; For some powers, claims of promotion of human rights and democracy can only last as long as they can be used as instruments of pressure and intimidation against other nations. But when it comes to the interests of the claimants, concepts such as democracy, the right of self-determination of nations, respect for the rights and intelligence of peoples, international law and justice have no place or value. This is blatantly manifested in the way the elected Government of the Palestinian people is treated as well as in the support extended to the Zionist regime. It does not matter if people are murdered in Palestine, turned into refugees, captured, imprisoned or besieged; that must not violate human rights.

- Nations are not equal in exercising their rights recognized by international
law. Enjoying these rights is dependent on the whim of certain major powers.

- Apparently the Security Council can only be used to ensure the security and
the rights of some big powers. But when the oppressed are decimated under
bombardment, the Security Council must remain aloof and not even call for a
Is this not a tragedy of historic proportions for the Security Council,
which is charged with maintaining the security of countries?

- The prevailing order of contemporary global interactions is such that certain
powers equate themselves with the international community, and consider
their decisions superseding that of over 180 countries. They consider
themselves the masters and rulers of the entire world and other nations as only
second class in the world order.

The question needs to be asked: if the Governments of the United States or the United Kingdom who are permanent members of the Security Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations? Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse. If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it to the Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more clear evidence of injustice?

Regrettably, the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their
exclusionist policies on international decision making mechanisms, including the
Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in global public opinion,
undermining the credibility and effectiveness of this most universal system of
collective security.

How long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that the behavior
of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated agencies.

The present structure and working methods of the Security Council, which are
legacies of the Second World War, are not responsive to the expectations of the
current generation and the contemporary needs of humanity.

Today, it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and urgently,
needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community in a
transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective.

Furthermore, the direct relation between the abuse of veto and the erosion of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council has now been clearly and undeniably established. We cannot, and should not, expect the eradication, or even containment, of injustice, imposition and oppression without reforming the structure and working methods of the Council.

Is it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions and
arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't this generation or future generations have the right to decide themselves about the world in which they want to live?

Today, serious reform in the structure and working methods of the Security
Council is, more than ever before, necessary. Justice and democracy dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of reforming the Organization and particularly rescue the Security Council from its current state. In the interim, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the African continent should each have a representative as a permanent member of the Security Council, with veto privilege. The resulting balance would hopefully prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.

Madame President,
It is essential that spirituality and ethics find their rightful place in
international relations. Without ethics and spirituality, attained in light of the
teachings of Divine prophets, justice, freedom and human rights cannot be

Resolution of contemporary human crises lies in observing ethics and
spirituality and the governance of righteous people of high competence and piety.

Should respect for the rights of human beings become the predominant
objective, then injustice, ill-temperament, aggression and war will fade away.
Human beings are all God's creatures and are all endowed with dignity and

No one has superiority over others. No individual or states can arrogate to
themselves special privileges, nor can they disregard the rights of others and, through influence and pressure, position themselves as the "international community".

Citizens of Asia, Africa, Europe and America are all equal. Over six billion
inhabitants of the earth are all equal and worthy of respect.

Justice and protection of human dignity are the two pillars in maintaining
sustainable peace, security and tranquility in the world.

It is for this reason that we state:
Sustainable peace and tranquility in the world can only be attained through
justice, spirituality, ethics, compassion and respect for human dignity.

All nations and states are entitled to peace, progress and security.

We are all members of the international community and we are all entitled to
insist on the creation of a climate of compassion, love and justice.

All members of the United Nations are affected by both the bitter and the
sweet events and developments in today's world.

We can adopt firm and logical decisions, thereby improving the prospects of a
better life for current and future generations.

Together, we can eradicate the roots of bitter maladies and afflictions, and
instead, through the promotion of universal and lasting values such as ethics,
spirituality and justice, allow our nations to taste the sweetness of a better future.

Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek Good, Virtue, Perfection and Beauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection. Whether we like it or not, justice, peace and virtue will sooner or later prevail in the world with the will of Almighty God. It is imperative, and also desirable, that we too contribute to the promotion of justice and virtue.

The Almighty and Merciful God, who is the Creator of the Universe, is also its
Lord and Ruler. Justice is His command. He commands His creatures to support one another in Good, virtue and piety, and not in decadence and corruption.
He commands His creatures to enjoin one another to righteousness and virtue
and not to sin and transgression. All Divine prophets from the Prophet Adam (peace be upon him) to the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), have all called humanity to monotheism, justice, brotherhood, love and compassion. Is it not possible to build a better world based on monotheism, justice, love and respect for the rights of human beings, and thereby transform animosities into friendship?

I emphatically declare that today's world, more than ever before, longs for just and righteous people with love for all humanity; and above all longs for the perfect righteous human being and the real savior who has been promised to all peoples and who will establish justice, peace and brotherhood on the planet.

0, Almighty God, all men and women are Your creatures and You have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause.

This is President Ahmadinejad's version of "Mein Kampf." It is a roiling diatribe that pins all the world's probolms on our chests and Israel's. We are a source of coercion and division, and Israel is a thief, and a destoryer of peoples. And in the end, President Ahmadinejad wants the mahdi to come forth and cleanse the world.

He is a fanatic, but do not let that make you think he is insane. He is quite in control of his machinations. He has a plan. He has thrown the gauntlet down before the United Nations, calling them ineffective, and daring them to pick it up. He believes that his nation should have access to all areas of nuclear science, including weapons, and that no one can stop him. If the United Nations picks up that gauntlet, he is not going to recognize them, or their authority.

And when all was said and done, the world, hopefully woke up, and realized that the time to move is now. We must move together to prevent Iran from going any further. After President Ahmadinejad's address, I joined Thomas in the den to listen to the caller's reactions to the address on Hugh Hewitt's show.

The people calling in (except the one, nutty Lefty) agreed that what they just witnessed was Hitler from the 1930's all over again. A few even made the equation that President Ahmadinejad was the Antichrist (and just to set the record straight, I mentioned it in jest to Thomas). Regardless of what anyone called him, we all understood what he said, and we all understand what is at stake.

We are looking at two paths. One leads us to peace, where radicals like those trying to kill us are no longer around. The other leads us to the end of the human race. And all I have to say is that we had beeter choose the right path.



Post a Comment

<< Home

weight loss product