Ahmadinejad's UN speech regarding 9/11

[Carsten Wiethoff]

Here is the part of the transcript that deals with 9/11.
Full transcript here.

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

First, the event of the II 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 thousand people were killed on the 11 th 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 ofpeople 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 II September so that in the future expressing views about it is not

forbidden.



. I wish to announce here that next year the Islamic Republic of Iran will host a

conference to study terrorism and the means to confront it. I invite officials, scholars,

thinkers, researchers and research institutes of all countries to attend this conference.

Who is that individual mentioned by Ahmadinejad?

[Peter Lemkin]

Here is the part of the transcript that deals with 9/11.
Full transcript here.

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

First, the event of the II 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 thousand people were killed on the 11 th 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 ofpeople 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 II September so that in the future expressing views about it is not

forbidden.



. I wish to announce here that next year the Islamic Republic of Iran will host a

conference to study terrorism and the means to confront it. I invite officials, scholars,

thinkers, researchers and research institutes of all countries to attend this conference.

Who is that individual mentioned by Ahmadinejad?

Likely a translation error or error on his part. I doubt he is privy to any information the rest of us have not heard. His speech sounds reasonable enough to me...yet 30 nations walked out so as not to hear the possibility the fairy tale of 9-11 is not true and the wars of agresssion on various nations and nearly everyone within their own countries is a ploy for the Oligarchy to gain further power and riches and take away freedoms and rights of the citizens within them.

If that conference will also take up not just the hypothetical, but various issues of 9-11 it will be quite the conference!hakehands:

[Charles Drago]

If Ahmadinejad had been an agent for the perpetrators of 9-11 he could not have done a better job demonizing the discussion of the events' true sponsorship.

Wait a minute ...

[Carsten Wiethoff]

If Ahmadinejad had been an agent for the perpetrators of 9-11 he could not have done a better job demonizing the discussion of the events' true sponsorship.

Wait a minute ...

I think in the current atmosphere Ahmadinejad is already so demonized that it really does not matter what he says any more. For most people the fact that A. mentions 9/11 automatically means that it is a taboo, never to be touched again.
In fact if you read what he says, there are much more provocative statements in many 9/11 documentaries and books. But in this case it is clearly the messenger that forms the perceived message.

[Mark Stapleton]

If Ahmadinejad had been an agent for the perpetrators of 9-11 he could not have done a better job demonizing the discussion of the events' true sponsorship.

Wait a minute ...

I agree. Zionist Israel was in up to its neck on 9/11. I'ts so obvious.

I like Ahmadinejad. He has balls.

[Peter Lemkin]

http://gadebate.un.org/Portals/1/stateme...0IR_en.pdf

[Ed Jewett]

"Ahmadinejad, as of the count yesterday, had 950 stories condemning his “outrageous” statements at the United Nations. Please note that a total of 27 nations walked out, not the people of those nations but representatives of the governments.

What we fail to note is that 163 nations stayed."



http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/09/24/...elling-us/

The full text:

"When President Ahmadinejad announced, before the United Nations that most people in the world believe that the U.S. government was involved in the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks, he told the truth. In America, groups have been popping up for years, not “fringe” types, but military and professional organizations, architects, engineers, pilots, intelligence officers. There is a vast underground that is never reported, never spoken of in the news and continually threatened. The FBI and Homeland Security have infiltrated these groups, illegal surveillance has been on a massive scale and, as the groups have grown and their reach has touched millions of Americans, the government, in the usual whispers, is talking about mass arrests, “unplugging” the internet, all those things the militia movements of the 90′s said would happen.
Outside the United States, not in the Middle East, but Canada, Europe, Latin America and the Far East, finding people who accept the Bush and Obama administration’s “party line” about “box cutters and hijackers” is difficult. No one wants to risk the public scorn of seeming like an imbecile.
However, back here in the “good ole’ USA,” even comedian Jon Stewart, normally an outspoken critic of government insanity, has agreed to lead a march on Washinton to quell “rumors” about 9/11, rumors of wrongdoing by people he despises.
What is the difference? Why do those outside the United States see things do differently? The answer is freedom of press, the first of the hasty additions to the constitution, a guarantee provided for in the 1st Amendment. There had been assaults on freedom of the press before, particularly during wartime but never anything on the scale seen after 9/11. Across the board, not just the news but even movies and television shows, fiction, censored, propaganda, peddling ignorance, fear and screaming “conspiracy theory” at anyone trying to get word out.
America is a dictatorship.
It isn’t just corporate lobbyists or two broken political parties. Elections are rigged, government agencies meant to provide for national security are now doing little but spying on Americans, our military is spread across the planet, tasked with everything but serving the United States. All the while, the “news” is everything but. Americans, to a one, know something is terribly wrong, totally out of control and, even their attempts to get at some semblance of truth are turned against them. The news is censored. With the country embroiled in two failed wars, obviously illegal, proof of war crimes piling up, financial collapse, citizen’s rights trampled on, nary a word is said about any of it.
“The president is a Muslim.” “Healthcare is socialism.” “The rich need their tax breaks, the same ones that pushed the country into 13.5 trillion in debt.”
The real message is always the same if you listen carefully, “be afraid, trust in government.” What are they really saying? “Greed is good.” How is that working out for you?
Ahmadinejad, as of the count yesterday, had 950 stories condemning his “outrageous” statements at the United Nations. Please note that a total of 27 nations walked out, not the people of those nations but representatives of the governments.
What we fail to note is that 163 nations stayed.
A few years ago, Ahmadinejad had a conference to discuss the holocaust. Scholars from around the world came, some openly hostile to Israel, some because they were scholars. It was called “outrageous” and Israel threatened to break up the meeting with a nuclear attack. What happened there, what were the findings? We will never know. Censorship in the American press, the same censorship that prevented evidence proving Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction from reaching the public, the same censorship that should have told Americans that Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11, was imposed.
The truth never benefits from censorship. Censorship is dictatorship. Dictatorship is when those in power no longer trust the people. A government that doesn’t trust its own people can’t serve its people, its people serve it. This is the America of today.
9 years of censorship now clouds 9/11.
When President Bush announced that he saw the first plane crash into the World Trade Center, live TV, it was shown once and hidden away. TV never showed that, not real TV, not the kind the public sees. Bush may have watched it, but if he is telling the truth, it means he knew in advance. Does this explain why he simply sat there? When Larry Silverstein said that he ordered one of the World Trade Center buildings, number 7, “pulled,” meaning “blown up” did it mean that explosives had been planted in all the buildings? It sure looked like it to me."

[Peter Lemkin]

trying to find complete list, but here is partial list of nations that walked out....Argentina, Australia, Britain, Canada, Costa Rica, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand and the U.S.

[Malcolm Pryce]

Ahmadinejad's speech has gone down surprisingly well with Daily Mail readers. At least half of the twenty plus commenters agree with him about 9/11!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ve-Israel.html

[Magda Hassan]

Ahmadinejad's speech has gone down surprisingly well with Daily Mail readers. At least half of the twenty plus commenters agree with him about 9/11!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ve-Israel.html

That links gone.....