Ahmedinejad transcript most of it except first page

[lovuian]

http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-17/0709257167021844.htm

Its very interesting read Very Illuminating

Reading between the lines

He really threw a bunch of punches

Heres one

at the end

"I think that if the U.S. administration, if the U.S. government puts aside some of its old behaviors, it can actually be a good friend for the Iranian people, for the Iranian nation.

For 28 years, they've consistently threatened us, insulted us, prevented our scientific development, every day, under one pretext or another.

You all know Saddam, the dictator, was supported by the government of the United States and some European countries in attacking Iran.

And he carried out an eight-year war, a criminal war. Over 200,000 Iranians lost their lives. Over 600,000 Iranians were hurt as a result of the war.

He used chemical weapons. Thousands of Iranians were victims of chemical weapons that he used against us.

Today, Mr. Nobaveh, who is a reporter, an official reporter, international reporter, who was covering U.N. reports in the U.N. for many years, he is one of the victims of the chemical weapons used by Iraq against us. "

Hey if anybody could find the first page that would be awesome :)

[ShaneGR]

1. And here's him denying the holocaust....

"They have created a myth in the name of the Holocaust and consider it above God, religion and the prophets," Ahmadinejad said in an address carried live on state television."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/14/AR2005121402403.html


The enemy of my enemy does not need to be my friend. Guys a whack job, just like Bush is.

[lovuian]

2. on what page of the transcript did he say it was a MYTH

Heres the question I saw from the transcript

QUESTION: Mr. President, a further set of questions challenged your view of the Holocaust. Since the evidence that this occurred in Europe in the 1940s, as a result of the actions of the German Nazi government, since that -- those facts -- are well documented, why are you calling for additional research? There seems to be no purpose in doing so, other than to question whether the Holocaust actually occurred as a historical fact. Can you explain why you believe more research is needed into the facts of what are what are
incontrovertible?
AHMADINEJAD: Thank you very much for your question. I am an academic, and you are as well. Can you argue that researching a phenomenon is finished, forever done? Can we close the books for good on a historical event?
There are different perspectives that come to light after every research is done. Why should we stop research at all? Why should we stop the progress of science and knowledge?
You shouldn't ask me why I'm asking questions. You should ask yourselves why you think that that's questionable? Why do you want to stop the progress of science and research?
Do you ever take what's known as absolute in physics? We had principles in mathematics that were granted to be absolute in mathematics for over 800 years. But new science has gotten rid of those absolutisms, come forward other different logics of looking at mathematics and sort of turned the way we look at it as a science altogether after 800 years.

So, we must allow researchers, scholars, they investigate into everything, every phenomenon -- God, universe, human beings, history and civilization. Why should we stop that?
I am not saying that it didn't happen at all. This is not that judgment that I am passing here. I said, in my second question, granted this happened, what does it have to do with the Palestinian people?
This is a serious question. There are two dimensions. In the first question...

QUESTION: Let me just -- let me pursue this a bit further. It is difficult to have a scientific discussion if there isn't at least some basis, some empirical basis, some agreement about what the facts are.

So calling for research into the facts when the facts are
so well established represents for many a challenging of the facts themselves and a denial that something terrible occurred in Europe in those years

Let me move on to ... AHMADINEJAD: Allow me. After all, you are free to interpret what you want from what I say. But what I am saying I'm saying with full clarity.

In the first question I'm trying to actually uphold the rights of European scholars. In the field of science and research I'm asking, there is nothing known as absolute. There is nothing sufficiently done Not in physics for certain. There has been more research on physics than it has on the Holocaust, but we still continue to do research on physics. There is nothing wrong with doing it.

This is what man wants. They want to approach a topic from different points of view. Scientists want to do that. Especially an issue that has become the foundation of so many other political developments that have unfolded in the Middle East in the past 60 years.

Why do we stop it altogether? You have to have a justified reason for it. The fact that it was researched sufficiently in the past is not a sufficient justification in my mind.

...................................

Where did he say the holocaust was a Myth

I'm sure Washington Post is right just couldn't find it

[ShaneGR]

4. THe link I supplied is from two years ago...

Nowadays when Ahmadinejad gets questions about it he likes to start talking about research and science and how study is needed.

[lovuian]

5. Are you sure he actually said that? Sometimes the News Media

has a way of distorting what a speaker says

[tkmorris]

3. I've noticed something

I have seen quite a few posters today arguing how bad Ahmadinejad is, and they often imply that those they are arguing with feel that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

The thing is, I have seen no one make the argument that Ahmadinejad must be their friend because he hates Bush. I HAVE seen the argument made that just because Ahmadinejad isn't a good guy that nonetheless it is important to keep things in perspective, especially at a time when the drums of war are being set up yet again.

I have stayed out of this for the most part, mainly because I really don't want to be in the position of APPEARING to defend Ahmadinejad. The man's an ass. However, I have seen plenty of good DU'ers whose frothy anger seems to have gotten in the way of their ability to think objectively.

I would like to see Iran (among other nations) become a more secular and freer society. Banning communication, turning away it's leaders, and generally just having a giant hatefest will not bring that about.