[Peace-discuss] Amadinejad's speech

[John W.]

Very interesting.  Thanks, Mort.  As usual I can't find much to argue with.
But what do you suppose Ahmadinejad means by this sentence:  "There was an
event called September 11, the cause of which remains unknown and, like the
Holocaust, a true investigation was not permitted."  In what way was the
Holocaust not investigated?  I presume he's referring to the Jewish
Holocaust.

John


On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Brussel Morton K. <mkbrussel at comcast.net>wrote:

Answering Obama …
>
> *Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Speech in Kermanshah, Iran -January 28, 2009*
>
> Translated by Ebrahim Norouzi, MD
> (c) 2009 The Mossadegh Project
>
> Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
>
> Today we can look at the very dark and shameful file of Mr. Bush in the
> world arena—full of crimes, murders and treachery against humanity that
> joined the dustbin of history. The last page in this dark file was his
> support for Zionist crimes in Gaza. We witnessed how the innocent women and
> children were slaughtered by the use of banned weapons or otherwise. Mr.
> Bush rudely supported these crimes, with his wolf-like language of
> brutality. He is gone now, and God willing, will end up in Hell.
>
> Now a new administration is in power with slogan of Change and stated
> change in American policies, this is very good, a good talk since Mr Bush's
> policies were one hundred percent unethical, inhumane and contrary to Godly
> values and teaching of his prophets. Mr Bush's behavior and his policies
> were the most foul and criminal of policies the world has seen over the past
> 50 years.
>
> The fact that they have said they want to change, the talk at its base is a
> good talk, but bear with me the dear people of Kermanshah, people of Iran
> and all nations of the world, I want to talk with you about this change. The
> issue is important and it is proper to set forth this important issue in the
> presence of revolutionary and pious people of Kermanshah.
>
> When they say we intend to change course, the change may occur in two ways,
> one—a fundamental and foundational change which has an effect and represents
> a change in principle. The second way is a tactical change, a change in
> method and use of language only as a political weapon. It is very clear that
> if the intention is of the second kind, it would soon be revealed and the
> nations of the world would situate themselves accordingly. Here I want to
> bring up some of the actions of Mr. Bush's government and see what must take
> place if there is going to be a change.
>
> One of the main problems of Mr. Bush and his collaborators were the way
> they looked at human societies. They sought superiority and domination over
> others. They perceived themselves to be number one and ranked other nations
> as number three, four or ten. When they spoke with others it was from a
> position of conceit and entitlement. If this is supposed to change, we
> should no longer witness an America that sees itself superior to others,
> dominates others, speaks rudely to other nations and ranks itself above all
> others.
>
> The presence of military force around the world was the other wrong policy
> of Mr. Bush. You saw how they used September 11, the downing of twin towers
> in New York, as an excuse to invade and occupy other countries. Today
> American government for domination's sake has military forces from Japan to
> South America, from South Africa to the heart of Europe. The question is
> this: why should America have military bases around the world? Wherever a
> war breaks out, it is either due to the presence of American forces or due
> to their unnecessary meddling.
>
> When they say the policy is going to change, that should mean an end to
> American military presence around the world. They should pick up their
> forces and return to within their own boundary to serve their own people.
> Nobody in the world has asked them to mobilize their forces.
>
> There was an event called September 11, the cause of which remains unknown
> and, like the Holocaust, a true investigation was not permitted. Using
> September 11 as an excuse, they invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. More than a
> million innocent Iraqis died. Several hundred thousand Afghanis lost their
> lives. Several million became refugees. If you are talking about a policy
> change then give permission to find out the cause, if you are talking about
> a policy change it should mean removal of your army and forces.
>
> In Afghanistan you have brought an increase in narcotic production and
> insecurity. Change in policy means allowing the Afghan government to pursue
> its own plan to combat narcotic production.
>
> Mr Bush had the habit of permitting himself to intervene in the affairs of
> all nations. Mr. Sudan, why this? Mr. Arabestan, [Saudi Arabia] why are you
> praying this way? Mr. Iran, why do you want to progress scientifically?
>
> If they are saying that we want to change policies, that should mean that
> the American government should not interfere in the affairs of other
> nations. What business is it of theirs how other nations live, who asked
> them to come and interfere in their affairs?
>
> Mr Bush, without any question and unconditionally, gave his support to the
> criminal Zionists. They brought a group, gathered from around the world and
> exiled the people of Palestine with force of Gun, and placed those people in
> their place. Their mission was to constantly create wars, terrorize, invade,
> occupy and intimidate others. Mr Bush had closed his eyes and in an absolute
> way defended all the Zionists crimes, granting no rights to the Palestinian
> nation.
>
> Change in policy means withdrawing your support from Zionists, the
> non-native, uncultured, illegal, impostor, homicidal, killer of women and
> children and allow the people of Palestine to decide their own destiny.
>
> Mr. Bush humiliated American nation. Insulted American nation. Listened to
> the phones of all Americans. Planned for and created a psychological war of
> fear and intimidation on American people. With this method he excluded them
> from the political scene and did what he wanted in the world. If you are
> talking about policy change, then lift the pressures off the American
> people. Allow people of America to be free and to engage in political
> affairs and choose their own destiny themselves. Why are you disgracing the
> people of America?
>
> Mahmoud Ahmadinejad As to the last part, grant me permission to talk about
> our dear Iran. We are at the threshold of the revolution. Those who say they
> want to change their policies should now pay attention. It is more than 60
> years that the successive American governments stood at the opposition of
> the Iranian nation. In 1332 [1953] with a coup they toppled the national
> government of Iran and replaced it with a harsh, unpopular and despotic
> regime. They took our oil and our wealth. They corrupted our culture and in
> return gave us a Satanic entity called SAVAK [Shah's security agency] that
> tortured our scholars, our young and learned people in their dungeons with
> one hundred percent American support.
>
> They kept us from joining the caravan of progress for 25 years, bringing
> poverty, misery and illiteracy to our nation. On 15 Khordad '42 [Persian
> calendar 1342, or June 5, 1963] they humiliated our nation and killed 15,000
> people of this nation and exiled the leader of our nation [Ayatollah
> Khomeini]. In '57 [Persian calendar 1357, or 1978] they killed more than
> 1,500 people in the Martyrs square and the killers received the American
> president's support. They stood by the side of dictatorship until the last
> day. They stood in opposition to the revolution of the freedom, independence
> and justice-seeking Iranian nation.
>
> From the dawn of victory until now, the American government has stood in
> opposition to our nation. They turned their embassy into a spy den, they
> invaded Tabas [a city in the east of Iran used by American forces in an
> attempt to free hostages], plotted a military coup, protected terrorists
> [MEK guerrilla organization] who killed more than 16,000 people, they
> encouraged and supported Saddam to go to war with Iran; eight years of war
> with their help, with their support, with their weapons against the nation
> of Iran.
>
> This very heroic Kermanshah was bombed hundreds of times and Saddam and his
> bombing was condoned by the American governments. They even defended the use
> of chemical weapons by Saddam. They insulted our nation and culture,
> frequently announced their intention to uproot the Iranian nation. They
> downed our passenger plane and commited hundreds of crimes against the
> people of Iran. They even rudely opposed our nation on the nuclear issue.
> Those who possess more than 10,000 atomic bombs shamelessly voice their
> concern about our nation.
>
> I think those who say they want to create change: this is change, to
> apologize to the nation of Iran and try to make up for their dark history
> and crimes they have commited against the Iranian nation.
>
> We welcome change but on the condition that the change is fundamental and
> on a right course, otherwise pay attention, otherwise the world should know,
> that anyone with the same speaking manner of Mr. Bush, same language of Mr.
> Bush, the same spirit of Mr. Bush, adventurism of Mr. Bush, even using new
> words to speak to the nation of Iran, the answer is the same Mr. Bush and
> his lackeys received over the years.
>
> We hear that they are making plans for Iran. We in turn wait patiently,
> listen carefully to their words, carefully assess actions under the
> magnifying glass and if a real change occurs in a fundamental way, we shall
> welcome it.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090203/bb72c9b8/attachment.htm